SENSE – 25 Horsegate

“We assessed a total of 9 quality statements from the safe, caring, effective, responsive and well-led key questions. During the inspection, we also did general observations and used the short observational framework for inspectors (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. At our last assessment, we rated the home good across the 5 key questions of safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. At this assessment, we found the service remained good.”

“We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it. We found the provider was meeting the principles of this.”

“The service provided safe, person-centred care with a strong emphasis on promoting independence, choice and wellbeing. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of safeguarding responsibilities and worked effectively with people, relatives and professionals to ensure safe and meaningful support.”

“There were established systems to manage risks and these were applied in a personalised way that kept people safe. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs, followed guidance from health professionals and adapted care in response to changes.”

“People were supported by skilled and trained staff who understood their roles. Recruitment processes were safe, and although there were occasional pressures on staffing levels, the provider maintained continuity of care through a consistent staff team and had access to additional internal support staff when required.”

“The environment was generally safe, although some risks were not always identified proactively. However, the provider demonstrated a responsive approach by taking prompt action when concerns were raised by us and made improvements without delay.”

“Care and support were effective, with thorough assessments, reviews and strong multidisciplinary working. Staff applied the Mental Capacity Act 2005 appropriately, supported people to make decisions, and ensured care was delivered in line with individuals’ preferences and best interests.”

“The provider and staff team were caring and respectful, with staff promoting dignity and inclusion. People were supported to engage in meaningful activities and maintain relationships, contributing positively to their quality of life.”

“Leadership at the service was strong and accessible, with governance systems in place to monitor quality and drive improvement. While some recording inconsistencies were noted, these had not impacted the safety or wellbeing of people using the service.”

“The provider demonstrated a positive culture, with committed staff, supportive leadership and a clear focus on delivering safe, effective and person-centred care.”