Last updated: 10 February 2026
"Staff feel valued and well supported with enough qualified staff, but unsafe medicine management and ineffective governance need attention."
Some aspects of medicine management were not safe. The provider did not always work well with people to understand and manage some risks.
Staff felt valued and well supported... Staff told us they felt able to raise any issues or concerns, including poor practice. Staff were confident senior staff would listen to them.
The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff had enough time to provide people with the care and support they needed.
Training records showed staff completed a range of training specific to the needs of the people they supported, although some updates were needed and also training in relation to rescue medicines had not been provided.
The provider’s governance systems were not always effective. These systems had not enabled them to address the shortfalls in risks we identified during our inspection.
People were supported to remain active and were able to join in activities within the home and the local community. People told us about going out for a walk, visits to local parks and staff told us some people attended a local gym.
Medication plans missing details on emergency doses, when to give as-needed meds, and staff untrained on rescue medicines.
Some people were prescribed rescue medicine and the emergency medicine management plan in place lacked detail about what dose should be given and when, and what monitoring took place. Staff supporting people with emergency rescue medicines had not been specifically trained to administer the medicines.
Training gaps with updates overdue and no specialist training for key areas like rescue medicines.
Training records showed staff completed a range of training specific to the needs of the people they supported, although some updates were needed and also training in relation to rescue medicines had not been provided.
Recruitment checks inconsistent, like unclear employment dates and references not always from last employer.
There were some inconsistencies in how the provider’s policy was implemented. For example, information relating to staff employment dates was not clear on 2 staff records. In addition, it was not clear whether the references obtained for some staff, had been requested from their last employer.
AI Generated
Last inspected: May 2025
Management Quality
Well-led: Requires improvement
Direct feedback from current and former employees

Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsApp