Last updated: 10 February 2026
"Staff feel supported with good training and a stable team, but weak oversight misses safety issues like generic risk plans and occasional morning shortages."
Some risk assessments were not sufficiently personalised... we identified some shortfalls in the management of environmental risks which the provider had not identified.
Staff spoke positively of their work and felt supported by the management team. The staff team had stabilised, and the team told us they worked well together.
The registered manager told us they had sufficient staff... However, while some felt the service was occasionally short staffed, they noted staff responded promptly. One resident said, “They’re very short staffed, especially in the morning.”
Staff spoke positively about the training they had received. Staff new to care completed the Care Certificate... However, they would like more training on supporting people with dementia and palliative care.
Provider oversight was insufficient to effectively monitor and address the shortfalls identified. The provider’s governance systems were not always effective in monitoring and improving the quality of the service.
Not covered in this targeted safe and well-led assessment; previous comprehensive inspection from 2018 exceeds 2 years old.
Leaders missed safety issues like poor risk plans and emergency kit problems because their audits and checks are weak.
Audits completed at service level did not identify or address shortfalls found during this assessment. For example, audits of care plans were not effective in identifying and addressing the shortfalls we found with people’s risk assessments.
Sometimes short staffed in the mornings and they use agency workers to cover cancelled shifts.
Staff said the manager arranged agency cover when shifts were cancelled. However, while some felt the service was occasionally short staffed... One resident said, “They’re very short staffed, especially in the morning.”
Risk plans are not always personal to each person and use generic details instead.
we found some risk assessments were not sufficiently personalised, with individuals referred to as “the casualty” rather than by name. For example, care plans for people with epilepsy, diabetes, choking risks... included generic information.
AI Generated
Last inspected: November 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