Humber Teaching NHS Foundation Trust

Ratings - Wards for people with learning disabilities or autism

• Overall

  Good

• Safe

  Good

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Requires improvement

• Well-led

  Good

Our view of the service

We assessed Townend Court from Tuesday 11 to Wednesday 12 November 2025.

The inpatient service at Townend Court provides assessment and treatment for individuals with learning disabilities from across the Transforming Care Partnership (Hull, East Riding, North Lincolnshire, and North East Lincolnshire). The service currently has 14 beds, with 6 on Lilac ward and 8 on Willow ward.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Support

• The service supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence, be independent and they had control over their own lives.
• The service worked with people to plan for when they experienced periods of distress so that their freedoms were restricted only if there was no alternative.
• Staff did everything they could to avoid restraining people. The service recorded when staff restrained people, and staff learned from those incidents and how they might be avoided or reduced.
• The service gave people care and support in a safe, clean, well equipped, well-furnished and well-maintained environment.
• People had a choice about their living environment and were able to personalise their rooms. The service made reasonable adjustments for people so they could be fully involved in discussions about how they received support.
• Staff supported people to play an active role in maintaining their own health and wellbeing.

Right Care

• The service had enough appropriately skilled staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.
• People could communicate with staff and understand information given to them because staff supported them consistently and understood their individual communication needs.
• People’s care, treatment and support plans reflected their range of needs and this promoted their wellbeing and enjoyment of life.
• People received care that supported their needs and aspirations, was focused on their quality of life, and followed best practice.
• Staff and people cooperated to assess risks people might face. Where appropriate, staff encouraged and enabled people to take positive risks.

Right Culture

• People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff.
• People received good quality care, support and treatment because trained staff and specialists could meet their needs and wishes.
• Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive, supporting their aspirations to live a quality life of their choosing.
• People and those important to them, including advocates, were involved in planning their care.
• Staff ensured risks of a closed culture were minimised so that people received support based on transparency, respect and inclusivity.

We rated the service as Good. We found 1 breach of the regulations in relation to person-centred care.

People told us they were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff worked hard to support people by identifying and mitigating risks. People were provided with information, could give feedback and raise concerns. The service worked in partnership with external partners to try and remove the barriers to discharge. Plans were in place for a redesign of and improvement to the environment as the maintenance of the environment was poor and it did not meet the needs of all people using the service. The service did not always ensure people’s care plans were consistently followed and where they worked in partnership with people and external agencies to agree strategies to deliver person centred care, this was not always achieved successfully.

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

All staff completed mandatory training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS), Mental Health Act, the Code of Practice and the guiding principles.

The staff we spoke with had a good understanding of mental capacity and were confident about how to assess it. Staff told us they took all practical steps to enable people to make their own decisions and provided good examples regarding raising safeguarding concerns.

People had easy access to information about independent mental health advocacy.

We reviewed 4 care records and found evidence that people's needs were met in line with current guidance and by undertaking capacity assessments and best interest decisions when appropriate. All detained people were made aware of their rights and restrictions were regularly reviewed to maximise their independence.

Multi-disciplinary team discussions involved people and their family in decision making and planning care and treatment. The hospital had good governance and compliance audits in place.

People's experience of this service

We spoke with 3 people who use the service, 2 families and reviewed 1 written feedback.

People told us they were involved in creating their care plans. One person we spoke with told us, “I am very involved in creating this.”

People told us staff treated them well and a relative told us they could see their relative trusted the staff. Feedback received was positive and recorded complaints about the service were minimal.

Individual preferences were considered for communication needs, dietary needs, cultural and spiritual support.

People’s achievements were celebrated.