Hazelwood Lodge Limited

Updated 7 May 2026

We carried out an unannounced visit of Hazelwood Lodge on the 12 June 2026, which included out of hours. The last rating for the service was good (published 15 February 2020).

This assessment was undertaken due to the length of time since the previous rating. Following this assessment, the rating remains good. The service is a residential care home for people with learning disabilities and complex needs including personal care for up to 10 adults aged 18 and over.

We expect providers supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people to ensure people experience respect, equality, dignity, choice and independence, and have access to their local community. We assessed the service against the principles of ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. The provider consistently demonstrated these principles were fully embedded in practice. People experienced highly personalised care which promoted independence, inclusion and meaningful control over their lives.

We found people received safe, personalised care from staff who knew them well. The environment was clean, well maintained and supported people’s comfort and wellbeing. Risks were assessed and reviewed, and staff used their knowledge of people’s individual needs to support them safely while also promoting independence where possible.

Staff were attentive to changes in people’s health and wellbeing. Medicines were managed safely, and staff worked with healthcare professionals when people needed advice, treatment or changes to their care. This helped ensure people received coordinated support and that changes in their needs were acted on.

Care was planned and delivered around people’s communication needs, preferences and daily routines. Staff gave people time to make choices and used their understanding of verbal and non-verbal communication to support people to express what mattered to them. People were supported to take part in activities and community opportunities which reflected their interests and helped them remain involved in everyday life.

Managers organised staffing arrangements to deliver safe and consistent care. Staff received training, supervision and guidance, and told us they felt supported by managers and colleagues. Staff worked together effectively and described a culture where they could ask questions, raise concerns and share learning.

Leaders had a clear understanding of the service and were visible in day-to-day practice. Leaders used systems to monitor quality and safety, and feedback from people, relatives, staff and professionals was used to inform improvements. This supported a service culture focused on safe, person-centred care and continuous improvement.

Updated 7 May 2026

People and relatives gave consistently positive feedback about their experience of the service. They described the service as safe, caring and supportive, and relatives told us they had confidence in the care people received. A relative said, “I would recommend this home to others, they are really good, caring and look after the people very well.” Relatives spoke positively about the relationships staff had developed with people. They told us staff treated people with dignity and respect and took time to understand their needs, routines and preferences. This helped ensure support was provided in a way that was familiar and reassuring for each person. People were supported to be involved in their care and daily lives in ways that reflected their communication needs and abilities. Staff listened to people and those who knew them well, and adapted support when people’s needs or preferences changed. People were encouraged to make choices, maintain independence and take part in activities and community opportunities that were meaningful to them. People were supported to be involved in their care in ways that reflected their communication needs. Some people did not use verbal communication, so we gathered their views by observing their responses to staff, choices, activities, speaking to their relatives and the environment. Staff understood people’s individual communication styles, including body language, facial expressions and changes in presentation. They used this knowledge, alongside feedback from relatives and care records, to understand people’s preferences and adapt support when needed. During our inspection, we observed a calm and relaxed atmosphere. People appeared comfortable in their environment and at ease with staff. Interactions were warm, respectful and person-centred, with staff giving people time, reassurance and encouragement. This supported people to feel valued, included and involved in their care.