Hazelwood Lodge Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This service scored 82 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider promoted a positive culture which focused on respectful, person-centred care. Relatives described the home as welcoming and spoke positively about the support people received. A relative told us, “We are very pleased with the home.”

Relatives told us the leadership team had a positive influence on the service. A relative said the registered manager “makes a real difference.” Relatives also spoke positively about the consistency of familiar staff, and the supportive relationships staff had developed with people.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and felt proud of the care provided. They said they would recommend the provider both as a place to work and as a service for a loved one. Staff also described the registered manager as supportive and available. A staff member told us, “I’ have asked so many questions to my manager, and he always makes time for me.”

The service was led by capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders who promoted a strong person-led culture. The registered manager described how they had actively worked to improve people’s independence, choice and control since coming into post. This was reflected in the way staff supported people to make decisions, express preferences and take part in opportunities that mattered to them.

Leaders had developed a culture where staff were expected to understand people as individuals and adapt support around their communication needs, routines and known preferences. During our inspection, we observed staff giving people time to process information and make choices. Staff used calm and patient approaches and responded to people’s verbal and non-verbal communication. This showed leadership had influenced day-to-day practice and helped embed a consistent person-centred approach.

The provider had invested in staff development, so staff had the skills and confidence to meet people’s complex needs. Training had been tailored to the needs of people living at the service, including learning disability, epilepsy, VNS (Vagus Nerve Stimulation), first aid, pressure ulcer care and suicide prevention and intervention. Leaders told us they arranged additional training when people’s needs required this, rather than relying only on mandatory training.

Leaders were driven making improvements to the environment and people’s opportunities. This included developing the garden, improving the kitchen so people could be more involved in meal preparation, and supporting people to personalise their bedrooms. These changes demonstrated that leaders understood the importance of dignity, independence and meaningful everyday experiences.

Staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager’s leadership. Staff described the registered manager as approachable, supportive and caring. One staff member told us, “The registered manager is a very nice gentleman, very approachable. I can discuss anything with him and he will listen. He is very caring.” Relatives told us the management team was responsive and had helped create a positive, welcoming culture. This showed leaders were accessible and had created a service where staff felt supported to deliver care that reflected people’s individual needs and choices.

The provider had arrangements to support staff, relatives and others to raise concerns. Staff understood how to speak up if they were worried about people’s safety or wellbeing and knew how to escalate concerns to senior managers or raise them anonymously if needed.

Staff told us they felt confident reporting concerns and asking for guidance. A staff member said, “I would report it straight away.” Staff described regular opportunities to discuss issues through daily communication, handovers, supervision and team meetings.

Staff said senior staff encouraged openness and responded constructively when concerns were raised. This helped staff feel listened to and supported to speak up. Relatives also told us they felt confident raising concerns and believed these would be addressed appropriately.

The provider had procedures to promote equality, diversity and inclusion within the workforce. These were reflected in recruitment processes and in the ongoing support available to staff.

The provider had reviewed the needs of the staff team to help identify whether additional support was required. This included considering staff diversity and how individual needs could be met. The provider also had initiatives to support inclusion, including networks for different groups of staff.

Staff were asked for their views through regular surveys, including whether their individual needs were being recognised and supported. The provider promoted reasonable adjustments for staff with disabilities or neurodivergent needs, including access to learning and information in formats that were easier for them to use.

Staff told us their needs were met in practice. They said they could request time off or flexible working when this was needed, which supported an inclusive and responsive approach to workforce wellbeing.

The provider had governance systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service and support ongoing improvement. Staff and managers completed regular checks across key areas, including care planning, medicines, health and safety and the environment.

The provider’s senior managers and quality assurance team reviewed the service. Their findings were recorded in reports and used to support the registered manager to develop action plans where improvements were needed. The registered manager monitored the service against the organisation’s key performance indicators, which helped leaders maintain oversight of performance and identify areas for development.

Leaders used a range of information to understand how the service was operating. This included audit findings, feedback, performance information and input from stakeholders. Where actions were identified, these were followed up so managers could check whether improvements had been made and sustained.

Staff described leadership oversight as visible and supportive. A staff member told us, “My manager does spot checks and gives me feedback by talking to me about what they have seen, including what I’m doing well and anything I need to improve.”

The provider sought feedback from people, relatives, staff and other stakeholders. This helped ensure different views were considered when reviewing the service and planning improvements. These governance arrangements supported consistent oversight and helped the provider maintain safe, person-centred and sustainable care.

The provider worked in partnership with relatives, healthcare professionals and community organisations to support people’s wellbeing and quality of life. Staff shared information with external professionals when people’s needs changed and followed advice to make sure care remained safe and coordinated.

People were supported to access their local community in ways that reflected their needs, preferences and interests. This included support to attend healthcare appointments, places of worship, day centres and social activities. Staff also supported people to maintain contact with relatives and others who were important to them.

The provider involved relatives and professionals when planning or reviewing people’s care. This helped ensure decisions were informed by people who knew them well and by professionals with relevant expertise. These partnership arrangements supported joined-up care and helped people remain connected to their communities.

The provider supported a culture of learning and continuous improvement. Staff completed induction and ongoing training to help them develop and maintain the knowledge and skills needed for their roles.

Policies and procedures were available to staff and reviewed so guidance remained relevant to current practice. Staff were also supported through supervision and team meetings, where changes in the service, good practice and learning were discussed.

Staff described regular opportunities to share information and reflect on practice. A staff member told us, “We have a group chat that we can discuss anything, and also during team meetings we can discuss good practice or lessons learned.” This helped staff remain informed and supported consistent practice across the service.