- Independent mental health service
Highams Lodge
Assessment report published 14 August 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We carried out an assessment of Highams Lodge on 11 and 12 March in response to routine monitoring. We spoke with 7 people using the service and 7 staff members, including the registered manager. We reviewed 8 care and treatment records. The assessment considered how well the service was providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led care in line with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) Single Assessment Framework.
Highams Lodge is a residential recovery community providing high-support accommodation for adults with complex and enduring mental health needs, including trauma and dual diagnosis, within a psychologically informed therapeutic model.
As a result of this inspection, our ratings changed. The rating for Safe has changed from good to requires improvement. The rating for Effective has remained good. The rating for Caring has remained good. The rating for Responsive has changed from good to requires improvement. The rating for Well-led has changed from good to requires improvement. Overall, the rating for the service has changed from good to requires improvement.
Systems intended to support safe care did not operate reliably. Risk information was not always up to date or easily accessible, which meant staff relied on verbal handovers and records did not always provide clear or current information about risks. Safeguarding systems did not consistently support oversight or tracking of actions. Environmental safety controls, including those relating to fire safety, smoking behaviours and evacuation planning, did not effectively manage risks. Medicines management systems did not provide effective oversight, with gaps in monitoring, recording and escalation of concerns.
These issues constituted a breach of Regulation 12 (Safe care and treatment).
Governance systems were in place, including management reporting and oversight processes. However, these did not clearly demonstrate that information was reviewed, acted on or followed through. Records were incomplete or inconsistent, incidents were not always fully recorded or reviewed, and leaders could not demonstrate reliably that risks were tracked or that learning led to improvement.
These issues constituted a breach of Regulation 17 (Good governance).
However, the service had a structured therapeutic model, staff supervision and training, and systems intended to support admissions, escalation and joint working with external services. Leaders were visible, and people and staff described a caring environment with predictable support in day-to-day interactions.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns identified at this assessment.