SeeAbility – Denecroft Residential Home

“Who the service is for”

“The service supports people with sensory impairments and people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.”

“Key findings”

“We carried out this assessment on 14 and 16 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this unannounced 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 people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the service was meeting this guidance, which meant people were supported in a way which maximised their dignity, choice and access to their local community. The service was situated in a residential area and there were no outward signs to differentiate it from other houses in the street. Local shops and amenities were within walking distance of the service.”

“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 and understood their responsibilities. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for.”

“People were not subjected to unlawful or excessive restrictions, they had choice and freedom over their lives as much as possible, and staff worked with partners to encourage people’s independence. One relative told us, “We work together to support [person] lead a full life.” A healthcare professional who regularly visited the service commented, “The staff are supportive and act appropriately in gathering consent from relatives and next of kin for the [treatment].” A member of staff told us, “Some people can make unwise decisions. If somebody doesn’t have capacity, then we hold a best interests meeting.””

“We found there was a positive learning culture and the registered manager regularly reviewed incidents to reduce the risk of them happening again. People were supported by enough staff with the appropriate skills and training, and staff were recruited safely. One member of staff told us, “The culture is great and the manager grows your confidence as well because we are always learning something new.””

“Risks were assessed, regularly reviewed, and people were involved in decisions about their care. Care records were person-centred and included details on people’s health and social care needs. There was sufficient information recorded in people’s care records to enable staff to support them effectively.”

“People’s medicines were managed safely, accurately recorded and regularly reviewed by relevant healthcare professionals. Where we found minor areas of improvement in relation to the level of detail in ‘when required’ protocols, the registered manager addressed these before we attended for our second day.”

“Staff understood how to recognise potential signs of abuse and how to report these. One member of staff told us, “If I see someone…”