Tribunal rejects plan for 'institutional look' care home for people with learning disabilities

A tribunal has ruled in favour of the CQC by refusing a registration application for a care home for people with learning disabilities and autism after concluding the proposed setting had an “institutional appearance” and looked “more like a hospital”.

Credit: Shutterstock/ Olesia Bilke

Lifeways Community Care (Lifeways) had applied to vary a condition of its registration by adding a location to provide accommodation and personal care to young people with learning disabilities and autism.

However, the panel found that the appearance of the proposed service did not match with the residential area it was located within and was too big - there was a supported living service on the same site.

It was decided this did not promote integration with the local community.

The judgement is an important one as it further clarifies what is an acceptable care setting.

‘Small domestic models of care and dispersed settings’

The new facility to replace an NHS care home was proposed for Springside in Walsall, West Midlands. The plans, submitted in April 2018, were to accommodate 10 people. It was proposed the home would be split up into three units offering three en-suite bedrooms with shared kitchen and living room facilities and three self-contained flats.

The unanimous view of the tribunal panel was that the proposed care home “had an institutional look to it and clearly had characteristics of a campus style setting which stood out and was apart from the surrounding neighbourhood”.

Furthermore, the panel added the Springside proposal was “completely inappropriate” with reference to the national guidance and policy advocating ‘small domestic models of care and dispersed settings”.

The tribunal confirmed the importance of Registering the Right Support, the CQC’s policy on registration and variations to registration for providers supporting people with a learning disability and/or autism.

It was concluded: “The national policy and guidance is (and is supposed to be) aspirational. It seeks to transform existing care provision going forward. The panel accepts that the evidence establishes that the small domestic model of care promoted by the policy and guidance is (despite the challenges involved) realistic, workable and achievable”.

‘If we accept Good Enough, we can’t transform the service’

Joyce Frederick, deputy chief Inspector of registration at CQC welcomed the decision. He said: “I am delighted the first-tier tribunal has recognised that our decision to refuse this variation in registration was justified and in the best interests of those who would have potentially used this service.

“The panel agreed with the analysis of CQC witnesses that to allow registration in these circumstances would not promote the “Transforming Care agenda” and that “if we accept Good Enough, we can’t transform the service and achieve the necessary change.

"This recognises the important role that the CQC has in making decisions about registration that protect and promote the health, safety and welfare of people with complex learning disabilities and/or autism.”