Kensington Hall

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 27 January 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 10 November to 26 November 2025. We visited the home on 10 November and 18 November. The service is a residential care home providing support to up to 13 people with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of our assessment 12 people were living at the service. We undertook this assessment to follow up on previous breaches of regulation and due to the length of time since the last assessment. We found people received safe care and were happy living at Kensington Hall.

The provider was previously in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation. There had been improvement to care and medicines records. The provider demonstrated a commitment to continuous improvement through their governance systems. However, some improvement was still needed as the provider was not consistently notifying CQC of all reportable events in the home. Immediate action was taken to review this, and it did not have any impact on people.

Systems were in place to keep people safe from the risk of abuse and lessons were learnt from events which occurred. At the last inspection we made a recommendation about person centred care. Although some improvement had been made, further work was needed to demonstrate people’s social needs met their goals and consistently achieved positive outcomes. People had holidays and took part in community activities. However, during our assessment we also observed times when there was little meaningful activity being supported.

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. The service was not consistently meeting some of the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture. The service is larger than recommended in current best practice guidance and is recognisable as a care home due to external signage. However, care was planned in a person-centred way, and the ethos and delivery of the service followed the principles of the guidance.

Regular safety checks were completed on the environment, utilities and equipment. People received their prescribed medicines at the right time and in the right way. Safe infection prevention and control practices were followed to minimise the spread of infection. People’s care plans were person centred and included best practice guidance on how to effectively support people with a learning disability and autistic people. People were supported to make informed decisions about their care through their involvement in the initial assessment of their needs, care planning and review processes. Staff treated people with kindness and respect and promoted their independence. Staff provided people with the support they needed to maintain good health and wellbeing. The culture of the service was positive. Manager’s led by example.