Minchenden 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 outstanding. At this assessment, the rating is 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 promoted a culture that focused on respectful and person-centred care. Relatives consistently spoke positively about the atmosphere of the home and the way staff supported people. One family member said the service “felt like home from home,” while another described how staff were “always welcoming,” which helped create a reassuring environment.

Relatives also told us the leadership team influenced the positive culture within the service. One relative said management were “hands on,” and felt this supported staff to provide consistent care. Others spoke about the continuity of familiar staff and the supportive relationships they had developed with people.

During the site visit, we observed staff interacting with people in a calm and respectful way and working together to support people throughout the day.
 

Leaders demonstrated the skills and understanding needed to oversee the delivery of care. Relatives spoke positively about the leadership of the service and the consistency of care. One family member said, although the home has new manager, “The quality of care is still incredibly high and has not dropped.”

Relatives also described feeling confident in how the service was run. One relative commented that staff “seem to be hitting all the marks,” while others said they were happy with the management and felt able to raise questions if needed.

During the site visit, we observed senior staff present and available to support the team and people using the service. Leaders demonstrated awareness of people’s needs and contributed to the smooth running of the home.
 

The provider promoted a culture where staff felt able to raise concerns and seek guidance when needed. Staff described feeling confident to report issues affecting people’s safety or wellbeing and understood how to escalate concerns appropriately. One staff member told us, “If I see something which is not right, I know I can contact my manager or other relevant agencies like the local authority or CQC.”

Staff explained there were opportunities to discuss concerns through day-to-day communication, handovers, supervision and team meetings. They told us senior staff encouraged openness and responded constructively when issues were raised, which helped staff feel their views were taken seriously. Staff also described being able to seek advice promptly if they were unsure about aspects of care delivery.

During the site visit, we observed positive communication between staff and leaders, with senior staff visible and accessible in communal areas. Staff spoke openly with each other about people’s needs and sought guidance where required. These approaches supported an environment where staff felt able to speak up and contribute to maintaining safe and responsive care.

The provider promoted an inclusive working environment where staff were supported in their roles. Staff told us leaders were approachable and that they could seek guidance when needed. The provider supported staff understanding of equality, diversity and inclusion through mandatory training and ongoing discussion about respectful working practices. This helped staff understand the importance of valuing individual differences and working inclusively with colleagues.

During the site visit, we observed staff working collaboratively and communicating respectfully when supporting people. Staff demonstrated effective teamwork and supported one another during care tasks, which contributed to a positive and inclusive team culture.

The provider had effective governance systems to monitor the quality and safety of care and drive improvements where needed. Care plans and risk assessments contained clear and personalised information about people’s needs and were reviewed to ensure support remained appropriate as people’s circumstances changed. Staff carried out audits to maintain oversight of key aspects of service delivery, including care records, medicines management and the home environment.

Governance arrangements supported managers to remain informed about the day-to-day running of the service. Senior staff maintained oversight of people’s wellbeing and the delivery of care through regular checks, spot checks and ongoing communication with staff. Team meetings were held to discuss operational matters and aspects of care delivery, helping to promote consistency in practice.

Staff performance and development were supported through supervision and appraisal processes. These opportunities enabled staff to reflect on their roles and discuss expectations with senior colleagues. Together, these systems helped ensure the service was managed effectively and remained responsive to people’s needs.

The provider worked with external professionals and community services to support people’s wellbeing. Relatives told us staff helped arrange healthcare input where required, including access to GP, dental and foot care services. This supported coordinated approaches to meeting people’s needs.

Relatives also described how the service supported people to remain connected with their community. One family member said staff would “ask if [relative] wants to do social events like pub lunch,” helping people take part in activities outside the home. Others told us the provider facilitated visits from community representatives, including opportunities for people to see religious leaders if they wished.

The provider promoted learning and ongoing improvement within the service. Systems were in place to support staff development, including induction and ongoing training to help staff maintain the skills and knowledge required for their roles. Policies and procedures were accessible to staff and were reviewed to ensure practice remained current.

Staff were supported through training, regular supervision and team meetings, where lessons learned and service developments were discussed. One staff member told us, “We always have an opportunity to discuss lessons learned, whether it’s through our team meetings or just a quick informal meeting with staff in the morning.” This helped staff reflect on their practice and supported consistency in how care was delivered.

The provider also sought feedback from people, relatives and other professionals through conversations, meetings and surveys. This information was used to identify areas for improvement and make changes to the service, which supported ongoing development and improvement in the quality of care provided.