Jane House

Updated 8 July 2024

Date of assessment 2 July to 2 September 2024 An assessment has been undertaken of a specialist service that is used by autistic people or people with a learning disability. The service had declined since the previous assessment. The service is now rated requires improvement. We found three breaches of the legal regulations relating to governance, and dignity and respect. Staff did not always assess risks to people’s health and safety. Governance systems and management oversight were not effective in identifying or addressing areas for improvement. The culture of the service did not ensure people were always treated with dignity or respect. However, there were enough staff to ensure people’s safety and meet their needs. People’s care experiences were used to inform care planning and review. Learning was used to improve service delivery. People used community facilities and lived in environments that were adapted to their needs and safety. Where people were deprived of their liberty this was done in accordance with the law. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment. 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.

Updated 8 July 2024

People could not be assured risks to them were mitigated. Some care records did not reflect up to date information. Some staff did not demonstrate respect when working within people’s own homes. People were supported by a multi-agency approach to meeting their complex and challenging needs. People had some choice and control over their lives. They lived in bespoke environments within secure grounds. Person-centred practices enabled people to make choices and decisions at a level and pace appropriate to them. Restrictions and decisions made in people’s best interests were lawful and appropriately authorised. People received support from familiar staff who knew them well. Feedback from people about their care experiences included thumbs up signs and comments including “I like Jane House,” and “I like the staff.” Families were consistently positive about the service. People had access to regular healthcare and used community leisure facilities.