Flora Innes House

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 18 June 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

This inspection took placefrom 29 April 2026 to 26 May 2026.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. There was a lead inspector, and an Expert by Experience carrying out the inspection.

Flora Innes House is a care home that provides care to people that have learning disabilities with complex support needs. At the time of the inspection seven people were being supported with regulated activity.

We spoke to people living at the service, relatives, external stakeholders, staff, and managers. We reviewed care records and visited the service. One of these visits was out of normal office hours. We reviewed audits, and saw policies including business continuity plans, safeguarding, recruitment, and whistleblowing.

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 the respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

People who lived at Flora Innes House were consistently treated with kindness and compassion. The service provided exceptionally tailored care, and support from a compassionate, trained staff team, who were skilled, knowledgeable, and able to meet people’s holistic needs.

Managers ensured that staff had relevant training, regular supervision and appraisal tailored to the needs of the people they were providing care and support to. They also considered any future needs. If restrictive practices were used, this was only after a full assessment, and often in response to positive risk taking. However, systems were in place with reviews to ensure the least restrictive options were being used and were in line with people’s best interests. Staff fully understood their roles and responsibilities under the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Mental Health Act1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff protected the privacy and dignity of people they supported.

Staff supported people with recognised models of care and best practice for people with a learning disability or autistic people. People , their relatives, and relevant stakeholders were fully involved and integral in their assessments of their needs with evidence of joint meetings and specific requests acted upon. Staff recognised the importance of family and significant effort was made to ensure contact, and support people with any losses. An example of this was supporting a person to plant and nurture flowers in the garden in memory of the loss of somebody close to them.

Staff fully understood and supported people’s preferred communication methods to ensure they could maximise their involvement in reviews of their personal and health needs. These methods were regularly reviewed, and staff evidenced their understanding of people's needs by adapting these as needed. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice, both as an approach but also daily observations of people. On one day of inspection, Public Health had issued weather warnings ,and the manager was proactive in sharing this. Staff were observed to be following it. Leadership was excellent, and governance processes helped the service to keep people safe, protect there human rights and provide good care and support. The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff were aligned. This helped to ensure people using services led confident, inclusive and empowered lives. The model of care and setting fully maximised people’s choice, control and independence. Care provision was exceptionally person-centred, ensuring people’s dignity, privacy and human rights were fully respected.

Staff worked closely with all agencies involved in people’s care and strived for the best outcomes for people. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living and reduce potential health inequalities. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment using appropriate communication aids and, if needed, found other innovative ways of communicating to support people’s autonomy.

The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equitable care and treatment. Staff worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. External health partners told us communication with the registered manager was excellent, reflecting a culture of trust and partnership.

Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally. They understood their roles and responsibilities.

Feedback we received from all partners was positive, with external teams praising the approach of the management and staff team.