Ten Acre Respite Service

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 30 July 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Our view of the service

About the service

The service is a residential respite service providing care for up to 5 people at a time. At the time of the inspection there was 17 people using the service on a regular rolling respite programme. At the time of our inspection 2 people were using the service.

Who the service is for

This is a specialist service for people with a learning disability and autistic people. We have 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. We found staff and leaders worked in line with this guidance.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 6 July and 13 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. 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.

People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Staff worked well as a team and felt supported by the management team. One staff member said, “I feel absolutely 100% supported by my manager. Senior staff are very helpful too. All staff are lovely, we have good teamwork and there is always someone to help you if needed, they [staff] are like a work family.”

Risks associated with people’s care were assessed and people were involved in the process. There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were administered safely and there were systems in place to ensure the environment was safe. For example, all relevant maintenance checks had been carried out to ensure environmental safety. The provider had a recruitment process which helped them select staff who were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Pre-employment checks were carried out prior to staff starting work.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. 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 managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives. Staff and leaders understood DoLS and ensured people were supported in line with their preferences and choices were offered. One staff member said, “Every individual we support has the right to make their own decisions if they have the capacity to do so. We [staff] follow the 5 statutory principles regarding the Mental Capacity Act. We have regular training and discuss as a team any concerns regarding DoLS.”

People’s needs were assessed and kept under review to ensure any changes to people’s care were identified. Staff were introduced to people at a pace people could tolerate and staff built good relationships with them. Staff and leaders spoke with people’s family members prior to each person’s stay to ensure up to date information was captured.

Staff were welcoming, friendly, and showed a good understanding of people’s preferences. Care and support were delivered in a thoughtful and caring way and people enjoyed their visits to the service. Bedrooms were personalised ready for each person’s stay and staff were organised and prepared for people as they arrived for their stay.

People’s care plans were person centred and staff respected people’s preferences. People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their needs. People had scrapbooks to record activities and events they had been involved with during their stay at the service. This showed people had fulfilling lives and took part in social activities both at the service and in the local community.

People and their relatives had access to a complaints procedure and knew how to raise concerns. The registered manager confirmed there were currently no open complaints

The provider’s values of empowerment, togetherness, honesty, being outstanding and being supportive were discussed at staff meetings and staff were familiar with them. Audits were carried out to ensure issues were identified and actions taken to minimise reoccurrence. The registered manager had an overarching action plan which was made up of actions identified on each audit. Actions were resolved quickly and efficiently.

A case management system was in place to monitor accidents and incidents and to identify any trends or patterns. Any learning identified was shared with staff and the team learnt together and made changes, where needed, to improve practice.