Loading
Date of assessment 20 – 22 January 2026. The extra care housing complex, Danbury Gardens, is purpose built providing accommodation in a shared building. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual arrangements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s care and support provided by Help at Home (Danbury Gardens). Help at Home (Danbury Gardens) is a domiciliary care agency that provides care to some of the people who reside within the extra care housing facility. The service provides care to older people, younger adults, people living with dementia, a learning disability, mental health need, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. Not everyone who resided at Danbury Gardens received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment 24 people were receiving personal care from the Help at Home service. 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. A robust assessment process involved people, and where appropriate family members, along with health and social care professionals involved in their care and support. People’s expectations of their care were fully considered as part of the assessment. Risks associated with people’s care were assessed and any decisions made as to how risks could be mitigated fully involved the person. Where people chose not to follow the guidance of external professionals their wishes were respected and their understanding as to the potential impact documented. People were fully involved in the review of their care needs and were central to any decisions made as to any changes in their commissioned package of support and care. Staff, where required, supported people to attend medical appointments and liaised with health care professionals to promote people’s health and well-being, where assistance was requested. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. The service provided an out of hours service, with staff always being on site, enabling them to respond to emergency requests for assistance. People’s needs were met by a consistent team of staff who had undergone a safe recruitment process and were able to communicate with them in their preferred language. Training and assessment of staff competence ensured people were supported safely and effectively. The service was led by the needs of people and provided a person-centred approach to care with the person being at the heart of all decisions. Staff always sought people’s consent prior to all care interventions. People’s care records provided a personalised account of their care and support needs, including their prescribed medicine, which was managed safely by staff when required. Staff were supported through supervision, appraisals and meetings. Staff spoke positively of the support they received from the registered manager and of the training that enabled them to meet the individual needs of people. Systems and processes, underpinned by policies and procedures enabled the registered manager to maintain a clear overview of the service being delivered. The provider’ continuous approach to quality monitoring, enabled the registered manager to monitor the quality and safety of the service being provided. Partnership working with external health and social care professionals, and collaborative working with the extra care housing provider supported and enabled the service to support people to live as independently as possible.
npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-3824849639.Help at Home (Danbury Gardens) received a Good rating across all five key questions at its first CQC inspection in June 2018, demonstrating safe, person-centred care with strong staff practice, robust governance, and a positive culture. One minor governance gap was identified: questionnaire results did not clearly document actions taken in response to individual concerns raised.