The 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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 64 (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.

We received positive feedback from staff around the support they received from the management team at The Lodge. Staff told us, “Management here are very approachable, always ready to listen to residents, families, and staff” and “Management maintain a supportive and open-door approach.”

There was a consistent management and staff team at The Lodge. Staff we spoke to were passionate about the care and support they provide to people at The Lodge. Comments included, “The Lodge is not just a care home but feels like family” and “I feel the care given at The Lodge keeps people at the heart of everything we do.”

Not all leaders understood the context in which the provider delivered care, treatment and support. They did not always embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders did not always have the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively, or they did not always do so with integrity, openness and honesty.

While the registered manager was present at The Lodge, and systems and processes were in place to monitor care delivery and support for staff, it was not always effective in identifying gaps in care plans, risk assessments and equipment.

People, their relatives and staff we spoke with were positive about the management team at The Lodge. Comments included, “I know I am free to speak up about any issues I need to raise.”

The provider acknowledged where improvements were needed and had been proactive with addressing any issues identified during the inspection. They were responsive, open and honest throughout the assessment and responded positively to feedback given.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The provider had a speaking up and whistle blowing policy in place. Staff had received regular supervisions, and staff knew how to raise concerns and felt confident to do so. Comments included, “My manager is very approachable kind and caring and is always there to listen with any problems. They are probably the best manager I’ve ever worked for” and “Management are approachable, visible, and actively involved within the service.”

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.

The service supported a diverse workforce, and we received no negative feedback to suggest that staff felt disadvantaged or unsupported by the management team.

Staff felt confident with raising any concerns and we observed a positive culture during our onsite inspection. One staff member told us, “The manager is always ready to listen to staff.”

The provider did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider had systems and processes in place to monitor the quality of the service and whilst these were mostly effective, we did identify some shortfalls around equipment audits and information within some care plans and risk assessments. The provider and the registered manager were proactive with addressing concerns identified.

The provider acted quickly on areas of concern and feedback we provided.

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 worked in partnership with a range of healthcare professionals and staff recognised the importance of maintaining close connections with relatives and within the local community. One staff member told us, “We take pride in the little things that make a big difference, like regular outings that help our residents stay active, connected, and engaged with the community.”

Referrals were made as required, for example to district nurses. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments where necessary.

The provider did not always focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They did not always encourage creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They did not always actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

The provider had an approach to continuous learning and development related to some aspects of care, for example having a falls champion in place. However, some aspects of safety in the service had not been fully considered. For example, the safety of shared equipment, and ensuring all documentation relating to people’s needs contained sufficient information that was reflective of the person’s current needs.

We found no evidence people had been harmed. The provider acknowledged that improvements were needed and had been proactive in implementing improvements.