Haydock 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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to outstanding.

This meant service leadership was exceptional and distinctive. Leaders and the culture they created drove and improved high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 89 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had exceptionally inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and lived out the values of the organisation in their day‑to‑day practice. For example, this culture was achieved through highly visible and approachable managers who worked alongside staff and spent time with people using the service. This allowed leaders to understand day‑to‑day challenges, model positive practice and build trusting relationships with both staff and people. One staff member told us, “[Registered manager] and [Deputy manager] are very visible and get actively involved working alongside staff.”

Leaders ensured staff clearly understood the purpose of the service and how their individual roles contributed to helping people progress, build independence and achieve meaningful outcomes. This was reinforced through regular team meetings, supervision and day‑to‑day conversations, where managers linked daily tasks back to people’s goals and what mattered most to them.

The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture where staff felt safe, valued and confident to speak up in people’s best interests. Managers actively encouraged challenge and discussion, welcoming different views and using them as opportunities to improve practice. One staff member told us, “I feel confident to challenge decisions if it is what is best for the person.”

The registered manager used feedback, incidents, near misses and everyday experiences to share learning in team meetings and reflective sessions. Leaders focused on understanding what had happened and how practice could improve, rather than placing blame.

Staff consistently described a values‑led approach to care, explaining they worked with people rather than for them. One staff member told us, “Everything we do is for them – we just want the best outcomes.” Feedback from professionals, staff and family members was overwhelmingly positive about the culture within the service. They consistently described it as open, supportive and focused on what was best for people, which reinforced inspectors’ confidence in the leadership and values of the service.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score:

4

The provider had exceptionally 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. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They always did so with integrity, openness and honesty. For example, the registered manager demonstrated highly capable and effective leadership, using audits, feedback and compliments, alongside robust risk monitoring, to drive continuous improvement. Learning from incidents and concerns was well embedded, which led to reduced risks, sustained improvements and people consistently experiencing reliable, effective care. The registered manager had excellent oversight of the service and was exceptionally knowledgeable about all the people supported, while maintaining strong, trusting relationships with staff and external stakeholders.

Staff spoke very positively about the registered manager, describing them as supportive, approachable and inspirational. One staff member told us, “[Manager] is brilliant,” while another said, “[Manager] is great. I have worked here a long time and I love it.” The registered manager was visibly passionate and proud of the work being delivered, and staff morale was high. Many staff had worked at the service for a long period of time, which reflected a stable, motivated and committed workforce.

Feedback from a professional further reinforced this. They described the registered manager as offering clear and confident direction, being open and transparent in their leadership approach, and acting as a strong advocate for people and their families. They told us the manager was not driven by status or qualifications, but by what was right for people, and all managers worked alongside staff in leading the service, creating a highly inclusive and collaborative leadership culture.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. For example, people told us they felt able to speak up and share their views, concerns and ideas. Staff encouraged open communication and ensured people knew how to raise concerns or provide feedback. People’s feedback was listened to and used to make improvements, with several examples leading to positive change. One staff member told us, “Everyone is comfortable to raise any concerns they have, and these are then fed back from the team at senior leadership team meetings.” Managers responded promptly and respectfully to feedback. A whistleblowing policy was in place and accessible, and staff were aware of how to use it if needed.

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. For example, recruitment and employment practices were fair and based on skills and values. Staff received equality, diversity and inclusion training as part of their induction, and the service used staff surveys, supervision discussions and regular feedback to understand staff experiences and identify any potential inequalities. Managers reviewed this information and acted where needed to improve fairness and inclusion. The registered manager confirmed supervision arrangements were adjusted to reflect individual needs, offering weekly supervision instead of monthly where staff required additional support. This helped support staff wellbeing and ensured staff had equitable access to the guidance and support they needed.

The service was exceptionally well governed and managed, with clear and effective systems in place to monitor quality, safety and performance. For example, governance arrangements were robust, well‑embedded and actively used to drive continuous improvement. Managers completed a comprehensive programme of audits, including medication management, personal protective equipment (PPE), daily walk‑around checks and mealtime experience audits. Findings from audits were reviewed promptly, with clear actions identified, completed and monitored to ensure improvements were sustained.

Management oversight was further strengthened through regular governance activity. Weekly senior leadership team (SLT) meetings were held to review accidents, incidents and other key information to identify any patterns, trends or emerging risks. Lessons learned were shared with the wider staff team, and learning from incidents was used to reduce risk and improve practice. This ensured issues were not viewed in isolation but were considered strategically to support safer and more consistent care.

Managers were highly engaged and maintained close oversight of day‑to‑day practice, spending time working alongside staff and people using the service. This approach meant managers had a strong understanding of practice on the ground and were able to provide timely support where needed. At times, managers also provided direct operational support to ensure continuity of care. Staff told us managers were approachable and supportive, which contributed to a positive and motivated workforce.

The provider demonstrated a strong commitment to learning, development and long‑term sustainability. Staff retention was high, with many staff having worked at the service for a significant period, supporting consistency and continuity of care. Clear opportunities for progression were available for staff who wished to develop, with access to training, shadowing opportunities and ongoing support to build skills and confidence. Workforce planning arrangements ensured staffing levels and skill mix met people’s needs now and into the future.

The service planned its finances and day‑to‑day running well, which helped it continue to provide safe, good‑quality care over the long term. Leaders were confident the service could keep meeting people’s needs and respond to future challenges.

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. For example, the service worked effectively in partnership with external professionals to support people’s care, rehabilitation and risk management. A visiting professional told us, “The team are open and transparent in discussions, and receptive to feedback.” Communication was described as timely and well organised, with meetings and visits arranged to support joined‑up working. Professionals told us staff listened carefully to clinical guidance, with one stating, “Staff listen to clinical feedback and will usually discuss how recommendations can be implemented in practice.” Where guidance could not be implemented straight away, professionals told us staff explained their reasoning and suggested suitable alternatives. This collaborative approach supported safe decision‑making, continuity of care and positive outcomes for people.

The provider had a strong focus on learning, improving and trying new ways of working to make life better for people. They encouraged staff to think creatively about how to give people the same quality of experience, outcomes and quality of life. For example, the registered manager welcomed feedback and inspections and saw them as opportunities to learn and improve. They explained there was a shared approach across the service, saying “we all want the same thing,” which helped keep everyone focused on doing the best for people.

The registered manager ensured learning was part of everyday practice. Feedback from people, families, staff and professionals was regularly asked for, listened to and used to make improvements. When incidents, concerns or near misses happened, these were reviewed to understand what could be learned. This learning was shared openly with staff so changes could be made to improve care, rather than placing blame.

The service used learning to make real, positive changes to how care was delivered. A visiting psychologist attended the service weekly, and their professional advice was embedded into everyday practice rather than used only in response to challenges. This helped staff better understand people’s emotions, behaviour, and individual needs, resulting in support that was more therapeutic and less task focused.

Care records showed that, as a result of this approach, many people’s medication was significantly reduced over time, as staff were able to support people more effectively using non‑medication approaches. This helped people feel calmer, more settled and more in control of their lives.

Staff were encouraged to reflect on their work and suggest improvements through supervision and team meetings. Records showed staff ideas were listened to, tried out and reviewed rather than dismissed. This helped staff feel valued and confident to raise concerns or suggest changes, which improved morale and supported staff to stay with the service.

Managers completed regular checks and audits to look for ways to improve, not just to meet requirements. Information was used to spot possible issues early, before they became bigger problems. Learning from these reviews was shared across the team, which led to fewer repeated issues and increased confidence from external professionals.