Cherry Lodge

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

At our last assessment, the service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.At this assessment, enough improvements had been made and the service was no longer in breach of regulation.

This service scored 75 (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 had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

Staff were kept updated with the requirements of their role in staff meetings. These included any changes, lessons learned and the aims of the service provision. Staff meeting minutes showed staff were asked for their views and empowered to make suggestions. A staff member said, “I love my job… seen the bad times, it has much improved. [Registered manager] is brilliant, we have got through it, all is as it should be, good training and supervisions.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered manager was supported by 2 heads of care who job shared and provided cover 7 days a week, there was also a senior team of staff.

The registered manager knew what was happening in the service and in discussions during our assessment, they knew people well and understood their needs and preferences and how they were being met.

We received positive feedback about the management from people and relatives. A relative told us, “The bosses are lovely.” A relative said, “[Registered manager] is brilliant and the staff… [two head of care] are very good, nothing is too much trouble.”

A staff member told us, “I feel the manager does [their] job well, from when I came into the home to now, I see a lot of changes, residents who are falls risks have seated pressure mats for their safety, staff morale is a bit higher than before and the home looks better.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

There was a whistleblowing procedure in place which identified the processes when staff spoke out about concerns about poor care. A staff member told us, “I can go to the manager, or I can go to the owner of the home, they will both listen to what I need to say… If I feel the need to whistle-blow I will go see my manager, the home’s directors and if there is still no support, I will then come to CQC and or social services.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

A staff member said, “All the staff are great, they care, we are all equal and have a laugh. It makes the day, residents love it.”

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Improvements had been made in the governance systems in the service, these were ongoing. The registered manager understood the improvements made were not a quick fix and they continued to seek ways of further developing the systems in place. The majority of the areas for improvement had independently been identified by the service and there was an action plan in place to demonstrate how these were being addressed.

The registered manager had identified a recent change in the electronic systems in place did not meet the needs of the service, to address this, the previous system was being reintroduced. They had also recently changed the electronic medicines system and pharmacy provider when issues had been identified.

There was a notice board in the entrance hall of the service with staff photographs and their roles, however, this was out of date and did not give a true reflection of the staff working in the service. For example, there was a missing head of care, and there were 2 activities staff who no longer worked in the service. The registered manager told us they had identified this and 1 of the providers were planning to update it.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The registered manager told us they worked in partnership with other professionals involved in people’s care. People’s care records identified where people had received support or treatment, and guidance from professionals was included.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

There was an improvement plan in place which demonstrated the ongoing planned improvements in the service. The registered manager showed us new governance tools they had recently sourced which they were planning to use to strengthen the improvements already implemented.

The registered manager had recognised the need for additional training for staff to support people with their distress reactions and had booked face to face training.