Working at Short Break Service
144 Wythenshawe Road, Manchester, M23 0PF
Operated by Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
3 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
6.7/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 10 February 2026
Score: 6.7/10
Key Finding
"Staff feel valued in an inclusive culture with strong safety practices, but limited activities mean shifts focus on routine care."
Safety & Risk
8/10
✓
A more joined-up, cohesive and responsive approach to safety and risk management had been embedded into everyday practice. Medicines were managed safely. Systems which sought to protect people from the risk of abuse were operated effectively.
Staff Culture
8/10
✓
Staff spoke positively about their level of involvement and the culture within the service. Comments included, 'There is definitely a new sense of inclusion and belonging.', and, 'As a support worker I feel much more empowered and valued as a member of the team.'
Staffing Levels
6/10
✓
A wider staffing review had also been completed which meant the skills and experience of staff were better utilised across the short break and day centre services. This also now provided staff with a clear line of sight in terms of career progression.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff had the required knowledge, experience and skills to meet people's needs. Staff received a range of appropriate training applicable to their role.
Management
7/10
✓
Improvements had been made, and sustained, to strengthen management oversight and quality assurance. Roles, responsibilities and staffing structures were better defined. A new registered manager was in post, along with a new deputy manager and a new service-wide Matron for learning disabilities.
Programmes
4/10
!
The communal garden had been transformed into a space that was safe, accessible and welcoming. Rooms were individualised to people who used the service on a visit by visit basis to ensure an appropriate environment.
Points to consider
No activities coordinator or creative programmes like arts, outings or pet therapy mentioned, so shifts are mostly routine personal care.
No reference to activities coordinator, structured programmes, or specific engagement activities beyond environmental changes.
Only standard training mentioned, no specialist courses or funded qualifications for career development.
Staff received a range of appropriate training applicable to their role.
Staffing is adequate after a review and redesign, but no details on low agency use or super stable team.
A wider staffing review had also been completed which meant the skills and experience of staff were better utilised (per 2020 report; 2019 noted recruitment and retention difficulties).
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: December 2020
Good
Safe
✓
Good
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Good
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews