- Independent hospital
Brainkind Neurological Centre York
Report from 28 August 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings - Services for people with acquired brain injury
Our view of the service
We inspected Brainkind Neurological Centre York on the 27 and 28 January 2026. Brainkind Neurological Centre York is part of the Disabilities Trust- Brainkind is the operating name of the charity. The service is provided in a purpose-built independent hospital providing specialist post-acute neuro-behavioural assessment and support to people with an acquired brain injury. The service has been registered since 2010 and registered at the current location since 2024. The service is registered to provide the regulated activities of assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983, treatment of disease, disorder or injury and diagnostic and screening procedures.
The service had a nominated individual in place. The hospital had 36 ensuite rooms which were divided into 4 same-sex “Houses”: Foss, Brook, Tarn, and Spring. At the time of our inspection, Spring ward was not operational. The service is currently reviewing options for the use of this ward and therefore, Spring was not inspected. At the time of our inspection, there were 22 patients in the service. Each house had an 8 bed capacity. We inspected Foss, Brook and Tarn. As part of this inspection, we spoke with staff, patients, carers, reviewed care records and data from the service.
The service was last inspected in April 2024 and rated as good. We inspected the service to review the progress made following this inspection, where the key question of safe was rated as good. At the time of our inspection, the hospital director was in the process of applying for registered manager.
At this inspection we identified a breach of Regulation 18: Staffing as staff were not receiving regular supervision. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance Summary
The service had policies and guidance in place around the Mental Health Act (MHA) and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The policies were within date and had a scheduled review date. Staff we spoke with had a clear understanding of the difference between legislation and could identify the five key principles of the MCA. Managers had oversight of mandatory training of staff, ensuring staff were working within the regulations.
The service had a Mental Health Act administrator who could provide additional support and advice if needed, the service was supporting the administrator in further training in their role. Leaders completed audits of MHA and MCA documentation to ensure patients were safe. Staff knew who their MHA administrator was and how to raise any concerns or issues. Additional oversight was provided by the pharmacy team to ensure that people were prescribed medication safely and as required by legislation.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 6 family members of patients in the service. Family members told us that, “The facilities at Brainkind are excellent, the accommodation and the grounds are all second to none”. Family members told us they felt that the programme of activities could be more varied and told us their relative had told them they are bored. Family members told us the programmes were put together according to what staff were available. Some family members told us thestandard of care was excellent and that staff went out of their way and were very friendly, however others felt the service was clinical, not warm, friendly or welcoming.
Family members knew who they would speak to if they had concerns about the care their loved ones received. One family member told us, “I am pleased with the brain rehabilitation, and I am glad that it exists, the facilities are brilliant.” Another family member told us, “They do find out how to respond in the most appropriate way, they are very good at deescalation and my relative hasn’t had any incidents for a long while.”
However, some family members relayed experiences of seeing a decline in loved ones emotionally, physically and socially. Some family members felt communication from the service was poor at times, that they were unable to access the service easily and phone calls were not always answered. Some family members told us they were not informed of illness and incidents and not always involved in meetings regarding planning and care plans. Some family members told us that their relatives were not encouraged to get up, leave their rooms and be active.
We reviewed the service’s “Your Voice Survey” from October 2025 which identified that staff felt certain areas of the service had improved, including patient care and team work. The survey identified staff did not always feel empowered to do their jobs effectively.
We spoke with 5 patients using the service. Patients told us that they lacked activity and felt bored sometimes. Patients told us they were able to access the local community, but most told us they only went to the local shops. Patients told us that staff were not always regular staff, and they found that staff sometimes struggled to understand them which caused frustration. Overall feedback regarding staff was positive, with patients telling us that staff were always kind.