One Outstanding, two Good — and not one of them earned under the framework in force
All three 1st Enable registrations carry a rating published between June 2022 and March 2023, under the key-lines-of-enquiry method CQC has since retired. None has been assessed under the Single Assessment Framework that replaced it, and that framework is itself being replaced at the end of 2026. The ratings are real and they are good. What is ageing is not the grade, but the rulebook they were written against.
The 30-second read
Position
Three supported living registrations — The Technology Centre (Outstanding), 1st Enable Cheshire East (Good) and North East (Good). Ratings published 21 June 2022, 21 December 2022 and 18 March 2023. Verified against the live CQC register on 25 August 2026.
What's changing
The six shifts from the guide you downloaded land on adult social care as the draft Adult Social Care Assessment Framework (v9.1). Pilots run June–October 2026; the new frameworks take effect end of 2026. All three of your ratings predate even the framework that is now being replaced.
The pattern
Of the 12 supported living locations that held an Outstanding under the old method and have since been reassessed, 5 kept it. Of 250 that held a Good, 57 came out below Good. Governance is the single weakest statement in the reassessed cohort — 41% scored below Good on it.
The 30 minutes
What no register can show is where the evidence behind those three reports sits today, across three registrations run as one operation. You leave the call with the estate’s top-three readiness gaps and a first action on each.
Supported living locations that held an Outstanding under the retired method and have since been reassessed under the Single Assessment Framework. Five kept the rating. The count is small and it is the whole population — not a sample.
Governance in the cohort
41%
Of 721 reassessed supported living services scored below Good on Governance, management and sustainability — the lowest-scoring statement in this cohort, and the one the new frameworks fold into leadership.
The reassessment queue
342 in 2026
Supported living reassessment reports published so far this year, after 386 in 2025 and 146 in 2024. 722 of 2,824 rated supported living locations have now been through it. None of the three 1st Enable registrations is among them.
Your published position
LIVE CQC REGISTER · 25 AUG 2026
Three locations, all provided and run by 1st Enable Ltd, all registered for homecare and supported living, all with Mrs Sarah Gillan Dawson recorded as the responsible person. Every rating below was read from the live CQC page on 25 August 2026, not from a cached dataset.
Location
Current rating
Report published
On the register today
The Technology CentreInward Way, Ellesmere Port · 1-6957740561
North EastOrde Wingate Way, Stockton-on-Tees · 1-12038962872
GoodGood on all five
18 Mar 20233.4 years ago
No registered manager listed
One further register fact, because it is published and it bears on well-led: the North East entry currently names Mrs Sarah Gillan Dawson as responsible person and no registered manager, where the two Cheshire entries name one. The register does not say why, and neither will we — it is a question for the call, not a finding.
JUN 2022 – MAR 2023
All three ratings earned, under the key-lines-of-enquiry method then in force. The Technology Centre is rated Outstanding on Responsive and Well-led.
6 JUL 2023
CQC reviewed the information it held on all three services and found no evidence to reassess. That review is the last time CQC looked at any of the three — 3.1 years ago.
2023 – 2026
The Single Assessment Framework replaces the old method. 722 supported living locations are reassessed under it. None of them is yours.
12 JUN 2026
Consultation on CQC’s draft sector-specific frameworks closes; pilot assessments run June–October, against a stated target of 9,000+ reports by September.
25 AUG 2026 · NOW
Three ratings standing, none of them tested under the framework currently in force. Aged ratings are the third of CQC’s three named re-assessment priorities — all three of yours sit inside the six-year adult social care threshold.
END 2026
The draft Adult Social Care Assessment Framework takes effect. From then, an assessment of any of the three would be judged against written descriptors under that framework.
What’s changing under those three ratings
DRAFT ADULT SOCIAL CARE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK v9.1
The six shifts from the guide you downloaded are the rules this position is read against. For an estate holding three good ratings earned under a retired method, they cut one way: the grade does not carry forward, the evidence behind it has to — and it has to be readable on an ordinary day, from your systems, rather than assembled for a visit.
Outcomes over processContinuous, intelligence-led monitoringHealth inequalities in scopeWorkforce within well-ledDescriptor-led, not score-ledSector-specific KLOEs
The pattern in the supported living cohort
CQC REGISTER · 4,858 SUPPORTED LIVING LOCATIONS · 722 REASSESSED
We cannot place your own numbers beside the cohort’s, and we will not estimate them. All three 1st Enable ratings come from the retired method, which produced ratings but no statement-level scores. So there is no 1st Enable score to rank, and no key-question comparison we could honestly draw. What the cohort does show is the bar — what happened to services in your position when they were reassessed, and where those reassessments landed.
What happened to good ratings
An old rating is a starting point, not a shield
5 / 12legacy-Outstanding locations kept Outstanding on reassessment
57 / 250legacy-Good locations came out below Good
These are the whole reassessed populations, not samples. Twelve is a small number and it is stated as a count for that reason. The direction is the point: the previous grade was not what carried.
Where reassessments land
Well-led and safe carry almost all of the shortfall
180 / 722reassessed peers below Good on well-led
160 / 722below Good on safe
Caring accounts for 53 and responsive for 73. Nationally, among all services rated below Good under the current framework, 98% are below Good on well-led. The Technology Centre’s Outstanding rests on responsive and well-led — the two the new framework moves most.
Between visits
CQC reads your signals before it ever visits
Statutory notifications, complaints and workforce returns are already read between assessments, and the continuous-monitoring shift gives them more weight, not less.
Silence is a signal too — CQC treats it as risk, not as a clean record. For three services whose last CQC look of any kind was a July 2023 desk review, those signals are most of the current picture.
The six statements reassessed supported living services score lowest on. This is the cohort’s pattern, not a reading of your services — but it is where the reassessment questions concentrate.
Governance, management and sustainability (well-led)2.43 · 41% below Good
Medicines optimisation (safe)2.62 · 32% below Good
Involving people to manage risks (safe)2.63 · 30% below Good
Safe and effective staffing (safe)2.65 · 29% below Good
Learning, improvement and innovation (well-led)2.73 · 25% below Good
Consent to care and treatment (effective)2.73 · 23% below Good
Show what inspectors typically find behind each
Governance, management and sustainability · 2.43 / 4
The recurring finding is audit that records completion rather than learning: checks are done, but the trail from a finding to a change to a re-check is not written down anywhere an assessor can follow it. Across three registrations, the question becomes whether that trail looks the same at each.
Medicines optimisation · 2.62 / 4
In supported living the usual gap is not administration but the record of competence and oversight — who checked, how often, and what happened when a discrepancy appeared. Your 2022 Cheshire East report names STOMP work explicitly; the question is where that work is recorded now.
Involving people to manage risks · 2.63 / 4
Risk assessments that describe the risk without recording the person’s own view of it, or positive risk-taking agreed but not evidenced. The framework’s outcomes shift asks what changed for the person, not whether the document exists.
Safe and effective staffing · 2.65 / 4
Recruitment checks, induction and ongoing competence, evidenced per person rather than per policy. Workforce moves further into well-led under the draft framework, so retention and conditions become part of the leadership judgement.
Learning, improvement and innovation · 2.73 / 4
Incidents and complaints logged and closed, with no visible thread to a change in practice. This is the statement most often paired with a governance score in the reassessed cohort.
Consent to care and treatment · 2.73 / 4
Mental Capacity Act decisions recorded as an outcome rather than as a decision-specific assessment, and best-interests records that do not show who was consulted. All three of your services support people with learning disabilities and autistic people, where this is examined closely.
Everything above is visible from outside: three registrations, three ratings, the dates they were published, the retired method that produced them, and what reassessment has done to services that held ratings like yours. Your own inspection reports are quotable and strong — the 2022 Technology Centre report records that “the provider and registered manager showed immense passion for their roles and people were placed at the heart of the service”, and the Cheshire East report names STOMP work to reduce unnecessary medicines by name.
What we cannot see is where that evidence lives now. Whether the audit trail behind an Outstanding earned in June 2022 would read the same in August 2026; whether governance looks consistent across Ellesmere Port, Crewe and Stockton, or merely present at each; whether the practice those reports praised is recorded in a form an assessor could follow, or held in the heads of people who have been doing it well for four years. That gap is real, it is not a withholding trick, and it is exactly what the 30 minutes is for.
What we’d work through together
THE CALL AGENDA · NOT HOMEWORK
Six items, each turning on something only your side of the table can see. We bring the register read, the cohort and the framework; you bring the operation. All six are covered live on the call.
The evidence behind an Outstanding, four years on01
Governance across three registrations, one operation02
The North East entry, and what well-led rests on there03
STOMP and medicines as evidence, not just as practice04
The signals CQC reads between visits05
Your two weakest evidence areas, named06
Show what each item turns on
01 · The evidence behind an Outstanding, four years on
Turns on where the material behind the June 2022 report is held today, and whether it would still read as evidence rather than as history. Only you can see what those systems hold.
02 · Governance across three registrations, one operation
Turns on whether oversight is evidenced the same way at each registration. Governance is the weakest statement in the reassessed cohort, and the framework’s expectation is the same standard at every unit.
03 · The North East entry, and what well-led rests on there
Turns on your current register position at Stockton and what leadership evidence sits behind it while the entry reads as it does. A question, not a finding.
04 · STOMP and medicines as evidence, not just as practice
Turns on where the medicines oversight your 2022 report named is recorded now — competence checks, discrepancies, and what changed after each. Medicines optimisation is the cohort’s second-weakest statement.
05 · The signals CQC reads between visits
Turns on what your notifications, complaints record and workforce returns say about the three services today. Since July 2023 that is most of the picture CQC holds.
06 · Your two weakest evidence areas, named
Turns on an honest reading of the five key questions across the estate, decided together on the call — the two that become the next six months’ priorities.
The next report is the one that stands for the next four years
Reassessment of supported living services is running at volume: 342 reports published so far in 2026, after 386 in 2025. Whenever the first one reaches 1st Enable, its published report replaces a record earned under a method that no longer exists. In 30 minutes we narrow the six items above to the three that matter first across the three registrations, and the first action on each.
