The Granary

“Who the service is for”

“The service can provide support for up to 12 older people or younger adults, including those living with a learning disability, mental health, sensoryimpairmentor a physical disability. At the time of this assessment, 11 people were living at the care home.”

“Key findings”

“We carried out this assessment on29June2026.This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of goodremainsaccurate. 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.We found the provider delivered care in line with those standards.”

“People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment withappropriate legalauthority. 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 managedDoLSwithin the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA.DoLSauthorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictionsandhad choice,controland freedom over their lives.”

“People were supported by enough trained and knowledgeable staff to help keep them safe and meet their needs. Potential risks wereidentifiedand carefully managed, with people involved in decisions about their care and support. Strong safeguarding procedures were in place to protect people from abuse, and medicines were managed safely. The service also ensured the environment was safe and suitable for those using it.”

“The service regularly reviewed people’s needs to make sure they received care that was personalised andappropriate. Support was provided in line with current good practice, helping people receive safe, effective care.”

“People received kind and compassionate support from staff who understood their individual needs,preferencesand goals. Regular reviews andgood communicationhelped ensure that support remained suitable and responsive to changing needs. This enabled people to achieve positive outcomes whilemaintainingtheir dignity,independenceand freedom of choice.”

“The service showed a strong commitment to person-centred care. Staff treated people with kindnessandrespect in their day-to-day interactions. They encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and supported them to make their own decisions, ensuring they had control over their lives. Staff knew people well and supported them in ways that promoted their dignity and wellbeing.”

“Staff listened to people, valued theiropinionsand involved them in decisions about their care.People feltrespected,includedand empowered. The service promoted equality and inclusion, ensuring everyone had fair access to support,activitiesand opportunities, regardless of their circumstances.”

“The service had a positive culture anda clear visionthat was understood by both managers and staff. Effective leadership and oversight helped ensure care remained safe and ofgood quality. Risks weremonitored, and improvements were made when needed. The service planned resources and staffing effectively to support the ongoing delivery of high-quality care. There was also a strong focus on learning and continuous improvement, with…”