Moorland House

Updated 12 October 2026

Date of assessment: 19 October to 27 October 2026. Moorland House is a residential care home, registered to support up to 48 people. The service supports older people, including those with dementia. At the time of our assessment, 47 people were living at the service.

There was a strong learning culture at the service, supported by clear systems for reporting and analysing accidents and incidents. Opportunities for learning were consistently identified to promote safety. Systems to support safe transitions were extremely effective at ensuring people moved into the service safely, and smoothly. People’s risks were identified, assessed and understood. Staff supported people to take positive risks safely. There were enough staff to meet the needs of people using the service, and staff were suitably trained and supported to carry out their roles. The environment was clean and well-maintained. At the time of our assessment, some areas of the home were undergoing refurbishment. This had been carefully planned to ensure minimal impact on people. Medicines were administered and managed safely.

People were involved in their care planning, and this was regularly reviewed. Staff worked well together, and with other agencies to meet people’s health and well-being needs. Systems for monitoring people’s care were effective to ensure good outcomes, such as wound or weight monitoring. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were understood and followed.

Staff were kind, compassionate and treated people with dignity and respect. They took time to meet people’s physical, and emotional needs. The provider ensured staff wellbeing was prioritised with comprehensive support systems embedded across the service.

Care was person centred and adjusted to people’s changing needs. Accessibility needs were always considered, and adaptations made to provide inclusive support for those with mobility, sensory or cognitive impairments. The provider was exceptional at actively seeking and acting on feedback from people, and this was used to make changes and improve the service effectively. People’s wishes for the end of their lives were documented.

The service was well-led. The registered manager demonstrated proactive leadership, with a clear commitment to developing the service and achieving better outcomes for people and staff. Governance systems were effective in overseeing risk and quality. The service engaged well with partners, and the local community.

Updated 12 October 2026

People felt safe at the service, and we received consistent feedback that people and relatives had confidence in staff and leaders to ensure safety. We were told staff were proactive in response to falls. We received feedback around thoughtful transition planning, with people and relatives sharing staff made efforts to ensure they felt at home when moving into the service.
People told us they felt there were enough staff at the service. One person was keen to demonstrate the response time of staff when they pressed their call bell, who arrived promptly and with good humour.

People told us they were respected as individuals, and there was a strong culture of kindness at the service. Staff were described as caring, compassionate, gentle and respectful.

There was an exceptional range of activities available, supported by an enthusiastic and skilled activities co-ordinator, which people told us was a key strength of the service. People’s spiritual needs were also supported by a chaplain. Feedback included, “There is an activities co-ordinator who is absolutely brilliant, friendly, warm and upbeat.”

People felt the environment met their needs, and recent refurbishments had been done to a high standard. One relative shared, “The new décor definitely lifts your spirits when you visit.”

Feedback about meals was more mixed, with some people and relatives identifying areas where the quality and consistency of meals could be improved, however felt confident the kitchen staff were addressing this feedback.

People and relatives felt the service was well led. Relatives told us there had been significant improvement in leadership, staffing, communication and the overall culture of the home and felt this was due to the registered manager. They told us they had lots of opportunities to feed back, and felt extremely confident their views were listened to and acted on.

We received consistent positive feedback on the culture within the service, with people and relatives describing it as warm, welcoming and friendly. Feedback included, “When I visit, I am happy to walk through the door, I don’t need to take a breath, because I feel welcome.” And, “It was the best decision [person] made to move to a Methodist home.”