Higher Park Lodge

Updated 11 December 2025

Date of Assessment: 14 to 22 January 2026. We visited Higher Park Lodge on 14, 19 and 20 January 2026. The service was supporting 28 people at the time of our assessment, of a possible 34 places provided by the home. The service is a residential service providing support to older people some of whom were living with dementia.

We assessed 22 Quality Statements under the 4 Key Questions of: Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well Led. Our overall rating for this service is Requires Improvement.

The provider was previously in breach of 7 legal regulations relating to the maintenance of the premises and equipment in the home, the governance of the service, the staffing of the service,​ the safe recruitment of staff, person-centred care, safe care and treatment, and failing to maintain people’s dignity.

Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations relating to the staffing of the service, the safe recruitment of staff, safe care and treatment, and the failure to maintain people’s dignity. However, the provider remained in breach of 3 legal regulations: the maintenance of the premises and equipment in the home, person centred care, and the governance and oversight of the service.

The facilities and equipment in the home were now clean, and an organised cleaning team was effectively maintaining the cleanliness of the home. Some improvements had been made to the quality of the service’s décor and furnishings and people were now safe within the building. However, there remained significant issues still to be addressed in the furnishings and fittings within the building.

People were protected and kept safe. The service risk assessed people’s needs and acted when needed. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication and health needs. However, peoples social, and emotional needs, and for stimulating activities continued to not be assessed, planned for, or adequately delivered.

This assessment found there were enough staff with the experience to meet people’s needs. Staff received training and regular supervision and appraisals. Required training was being received by the staff. However, there were areas where training needed to improve, such as how to support people with dementia.

Care was now delivered to an adequate standard. This included, the necessary regular assessment of peoples’ needs, regular measurement of weight, the planning of peoples’ personal care needs, and the effective recording of people’s personal care.

People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. However, people were not always treated as individuals, choice was not always offered to people, and their preferences were not always known or respected. Though people were able to take part in some activities, some people said they were not being supported to do what they wanted. For example, going out of the building.

The service worked with all agencies involved in people’s care to ensure smooth transitions when moving between services. Leaders in the home were aware they needed to develop: the skills of both staff and managers, and the service’s approach to dementia care, to effectively meet peoples’ needs.

Updated 11 December 2025

People were generally positive about the quality of the overall service, their care, and said they felt safe. One person said, “They are looking after me lovely here. They are taking good care of me.” Another person said, “They look after me well, they are very good. They are always checking on me.”

People said staff knew them well and responded to their needs. One person said, “They notice when I am unwell. I was worried about pain in my legs, and they got a nurse for me. You only have to mention it and they are on the ball. They know that if I need help they will deal with it.” Another person said, “The staff check on me regularly and get medical help in when I need it.”

People said the home was kept clean and tidy. One person said, “It’s spotless, it’s kept really clean”. Another person said, “They clean in here every day except at weekends.”

People generally said whilst the quality of the food provided by the service was good, they weren’t offered a choice. One person said, “The meals are good. They just bring me a meal, there is no choice. I eat what I am given. The roasts are OK, but the vegetables are overworked (over cooked).” Another person said, “The food is good but there is no choice.”

People had mixed views on the quality of the staff. Some were very positive and others less so. One person said, “The staff are caring, they will find time for you if you need it. They gave me a little party on my birthday. They are very kind.” Another person said, “Staff don’t always knock, they just walk in. Most of the staff are friendly and caring but there are some which are just going through the motions.”

Some people commented that the activities and events were too limited, having to rely on their friends and relatives to go out of the home, but others said they did not need support from the service. One person said, “I spend all my time in my room which suits me.” Another person said, “My friend takes me out and I occasionally do some of the activities.” A third person said, “There’s not much entertainment here. You can’t go outside.” A fourth person said, “I’d like to go out of the home more. I’d like to go to the park but only get out when my children take me.”