Richmond Court

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 15 January 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 6 August to 25 September 2025. Visits to the service took place on 6 and 11 August 2025.

This assessment was prompted in part by concerns reported to CQC about a lack of management oversight of the service, staffing levels, safeguarding concerns, the environment, quality of food, lack of support for staff and medicines administration. We did not find these concerns were substantiated.

At the last assessment in June 2023, we rated the service requires improvement overall and in every key question. The provider was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, dignity and respect and good governance. This assessment was also carried out to follow up on those regulatory breaches. At this assessment we found significant improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

Richmond Court is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 49 people. The home accommodates people with a learning disability and/or autism on the ground floor. On the first floor, nursing care is provided to people, many of whom are living with a dementia. At the time of this assessment 46 people were using the service.

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 meeting this guidance.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual needs and risks, and how to keep them safe. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs in a timely way. Systems and processes were in place to assess risks to people and ensure they were safeguarded from avoidable harm. Staff completed safeguarding training and knew how to raise concerns. The administration of medicines was mostly safe but some records around this required improvement.

Staff supported people to make decisions following best practice in decision-making. Staff communicated with people in ways that met their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff supported people in a compassionate and caring way and respected their decisions and choices. Staff supported people to take part in a range of activities to support their emotional, physical and social needs. Care records were regularly reviewed to ensure they reflected people’s needs. The home worked closely with external healthcare professionals to support and maintain people’s health.

The service was well-led. The registered manager and provider monitored the quality and safety of the service. People, relatives and staff were regularly asked for feedback. The registered manager and staff promoted positive outcomes for people. People and relatives spoke positively about the service which they felt were due to improvements made by the management team. Staff spoke about improvements at the service, how morale was much better and how much better supported they were by the current management team. It was clear that since our last visit a lot of changes had resulted in tangible improvements across several areas of the service.