Choices Housing Association Limited – 1 William Street

“Who the service is for”

“This service supports people with learning disabilities and/or autism.”

“Key findings”

“We carried out this assessment on 27 April 2026 and 05 May 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.”

“We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence, and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.”

“People’s risks were managed in a way which ensured they had choice and independence. Safeguarding systems were in place to ensure people were protected from abuse. There were enough staff available to ensure people were supported in line with their physical, social, and emotional needs. Medicines were managed safely and systems were in place to ensure the environment was clean and well maintained.”

“People’s needs were assessed and reviewed to ensure they received the right care at the right time that met their individual preferences. People were involved in the planning and review of their care which ensured people’s support was centred around them. People were involved in the monitoring of their care through regular keyworker meetings, which included discussions around their goals and aspirations.”

“People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen for 4 people who lived at the service. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions, and they had choice, control, and freedom over their lives.”

“Staff and the registered manager demonstrated an exceptionally caring and person-centred culture, with relatives, people and professionals consistently describing staff as kind, compassionate and highly attentive to individual needs. Relatives expressed complete confidence in the service, with one family member describing staff as “special people.” Staff promoted dignity and privacy in all aspects of care, with relatives telling us they “go above and beyond” to protect people’s privacy and self-respect.”

“Staff knew people extremely well and provided highly personalised support based on people’s preferences, life histories, interests, and communication needs. People were empowered to make choices, maintain relationships, access meaningful activities, and live fulfilling lives, while staff actively promoted independence and inclusion. There was a strong culture of compassion, advocacy, and empowerment, which resulted in exceptional outcomes which had made a significant impact on people’s lives.”

“There was a positive and caring culture at the service, which focused on promoting people’s independence and ensuring people had the maximum choice and control of their lives. People, relatives, staff, and professionals spoke highly of the registered manager who led by example and was extremely passionate about the role they played in enhancing people’s lives. The governance systems in place were embedded and…”