- Care home
Cherry Tree Lodge Nursing Home
Assessment report published 5 January 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 18 November to 12 December 2025
Cherry Tree Lodge Nursing Home is a nursing home that provides care and support for people with a learning disability and autistic people. We found 3 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to person-centred care, safe care and treatment and governance.
The service did not show a strong culture of learning or improvement. Incidents were not always investigated, and lessons were not embedded into practice. Safeguarding was inconsistent, and risk assessments and care plans lacked detail and were not person-centred. Medicines management needed improvement. Staffing levels did not always meet people’s needs which put people at risk of unsafe support. People had very few opportunities for activities or trips outside the home, and care planning did not reflect individual preferences or aspirations. Reviews were not effective, and audits failed to identify issues, meaning improvements were slow.
Despite these concerns, people told us they felt safe and were treated with kindness and respect. Staff met physical health needs and collaborated with healthcare professionals. Infection prevention measures were mostly effective, and staff followed hygiene and PPE standards. Recruitment was robust and staff received inductions and supervision.
We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.
People's experience of this service
People were not involved in planning their care, and care plans lacked person-centred detail. Methods used to support people when distressed were not in line with best practice including the use of ‘time out.’ Opportunities for meaningful activities and trips outside the home were very limited. Feedback was not actively sought from people who could not easily share their views, meaning their experiences were not used to improve care.
Despite these concerns, people told us they felt safe and trusted staff. Observations confirmed staff treated people with kindness and respect and relatives said they felt confident raising concerns but were not always sure if anything changed as a result.