- Care home
Moriah House Limited
Assessment report published 3 November 2025
Contents
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
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.
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. The provider had a statement of purpose in place that described their visions and culture at Moriah House Limited which included how they maintained people’s rights and equality. The registered manager had an ongoing action plan in place. These managed areas identified by the audits the staff team completed as needing action or improvement, such as environment, care planning, medicine management. The management team encouraged people and relatives to express views and concerns through questionnaires and care reviews. They acted on the feedback to improve the service and culture.
Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
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. The management at Moriah House Limited had the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively. All staff at all levels were aware of their roles and responsibilities and the lines of accountability. People, relatives and staff found the management team to be supportive and approachable. The management team demonstrated throughout our assessment they were compassionate. For example, where risks where identified immediate action was taken because they understood and cared about the risk to people.
Freedom to speak up
The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. One relative told us, “I’ve got a good relationship with the office, and the manager is very easy to talk with about anything. I could easily raise any issue I might have.” There was a policy in place to provide staff with guidance on how to speak up. Staff told us they had the freedom to speak up, one staff member told us, “Yes, I am aware of the whistleblowing policy. I haven’t had to use it, because there are no cases of such yet, but I am confident the process would be handled fairly and professionally.” Another staff member told us, “Absolutely, I feel comfortable discussing any concerns directly.”
Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
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. Staff completed equality, diversity and inclusion training. Staff told us Moriah House Limited was inclusive. One staff member told us, “Moriah House has a friendly and inclusive environment. Staff support each other, and residents are treated like family.”
Governance, management and sustainability
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. There were clear and effective systems and processes in place to ensure the management team had oversight of the service. There was accident, incident and falls analysis in place. This meant the provider had the systems in place to identify themes and trends to inform them how to improve support and safety for people. There were management audits of medicines, infection control and care plans which meant the service had effective oversight, ensuring people were not placed at risk. The provider had a range of policies and procedures for staff to follow to ensure safe care. The provider had contingency plans in place in the event of an emergency, including for evacuation of the home.
Partnerships and communities
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 provider had policies and procedures to ensure information was effectively shared with appropriate agencies. For example, with the local safeguarding team. The local authority had completed a visit, and the management team actioned all their recommendations and actions.
A staff member told us. “We assist by liaising with GPs, dentists, and hospitals. We help residents attend appointments and record all visits and outcomes in their care notes.” Peoples care plans showed people had joined up care with Moriah House, health professionals and social care staff where needed. For example, one person had district nurse visit weekly to support the healing of skin damage.
Learning, improvement and innovation
The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. The operations manager told us “We have done a lot of learning since our assessment at [another care home] and we’ve learnt from that inspection and put measures in place to improve.” There were systems in place to ensure the ongoing review of quality and make improvements where required. For example, the management team actively listened to and engaged with people, relatives, and staff to learn and make improvements from their feedback. Staff had been offered further learning such as National Vocational Qualifications, to further improve their skills and knowledge.