Last updated: 9 February 2026
"Enough staff with positive teamwork to cover shortfalls and keep people safe, but training gaps in communication and safeguarding hold it back."
People were kept safe and protected from harm. Staff had a comprehensive understanding of abuse and knew what to do to make sure people were protected.
Staff explained how they all worked together to ensure staffing shortfalls were covered, and how there was always enough of them to be able to sit and engage meaningfully with people.
There were enough competent staff deployed to meet the needs of the people living at the home. Staff spoke positively about the staffing levels and explained they worked together to cover shortfalls.
However, we identified improvements were needed to ensure staff received training in line with best practice guidance. For example, staff had not received communication training every three years and safeguarding refreshers were every two years.
The registered manager was responsive to our findings and outlined the action they would take to improve these areas.
We observed staff were engaged in meaningful activities with people. For example, we observed people having their nails painted, engaging in one on one games and taking part in quizzes.
Training misses key best practice updates like communication skills every three years and yearly safeguarding refreshers.
best practice guidance states staff should complete training in communication every three years. We found staff had not received this training. All staff had completed safeguarding training however, the provider scheduled refresher training every two years instead of annually.
Basic activities like games quizzes and nail painting with no dedicated coordinator so shifts feel routine.
we observed people having their nails painted, engaging in one on one games and taking part in quizzes. At the time of the inspection there was no activities co-ordinator in post.
No clear system for working out staffing numbers even though levels are usually enough.
the tools used to calculate the staffing levels did not provide a clear rationale for how the number of staff had been determined.
AI Generated
Last inspected: April 2024
Management Quality
Well-led: Good
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