During an assessment under our new approach
Merwood Rest Home is a residential care home without nursing. There were 16 people using the service at the time of the assessment. The service supports older people living within the residential home.
We carried out this assessment on 31 July 2026, 1 August 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice. Key FindingsSafePeople were supported by staff who knew them well and understood how to manage risks whilst promoting independence, choice and control. People, staff and relatives told us they knew how to raise concerns and felt confident these would be listened to and acted upon.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding and recognised the signs of potential abuse. They knew how to report concerns and took time to get to know people, enabling them to identify changes that may indicate a safeguarding issue. Information on reporting concerns, including contact details for external agencies, was displayed throughout the home.
Staff supported people to take positive risks whilst maintaining their rights and freedoms. People were involved in risk management and care planning and were supported to make decisions about accessing the community and activities independently where appropriate.
People were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff and managers demonstrated a good understanding of the principles of the MCA and how these applied in practice. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found staff demonstrated a good understanding of the use of an urgent DoLS application to safeguard a person who had been assessed as being at immediate risk of absconding and experiencing significant harm.
Recruitment processes were robust and helped ensure only suitable staff were employed. Appropriate pre-employment checks had been completed before staff commenced work. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs safely and effectively. Staff consistently told us staffing levels were good, and people using the service said they received support when they needed it without unreasonable delays.
Systems were in place to monitor and maintain the safety of the environment. Regular audits and environmental risk assessments were undertaken to identify and mitigate potential risks. While some areas of the home appeared worn and in need of refurbishment, and certain areas required decluttering to ensure compliance with fire safety regulations, management had recognised these issues and had developed plans to address them.
Medicines were managed and administered safely. Medicines were stored securely, and staff followed current legislation, guidance and best practice when handling medicines. Records were completed accurately, and people and their relatives were kept informed of any changes to prescribed medicines, helping to ensure people received safe and person-centred support.
Effective
People's needs were assessed, regularly reviewed and reflected their physical and mental health, sensory, social and communication needs. Care plans had recently been updated and improved, with people and their families involved in decisions about their care. Changes to people's needs and support were communicated effectively between staff through detailed handovers, which included information about people's wellbeing, health conditions, risks, appointments and any changes in presentation. This helped ensure staff had up-to-date information and people received consistent, person-centred care that reflected their current needs and outcomes.
People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and were offered choice at mealtimes. Homemade meals, alternative options and lighter evening meals were available to meet individual preferences. One person told us, "The food here is delicious and I look forward to mealtimes." Staff used recognised assessment tools, including the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) and Waterlow Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Tool, to identify and monitor risks relating to nutrition, skin integrity and frailty. Where risks were identified, appropriate interventions were implemented and reviewed to support people's health and wellbeing.
The management team sought regular feedback from staff, people using the service and their relatives to monitor and improve outcomes. Staff surveys had been completed to understand staff experiences following changes in management and practice. Resident and relative surveys were undertaken regularly. An anonymous feedback box was also available to encourage open feedback. Information gathered was used to drive improvements and support staff to monitor people's outcomes more effectively, helping people achieve goals and improve their quality of life. People had access to healthcare services when required, and staff worked collaboratively with families and external professionals to ensure people's needs were met and positive outcomes were achieved.
People's rights and decisions relating to consent were understood and respected by staff. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's communication needs and adapted their approach, accordingly, including using written information, gestures and allowing additional time for people to express their views. Where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions, appropriate capacity assessments had been completed and recorded. Information was provided in accessible formats, and where appropriate, families, and other professionals were involved in decision-making. Staff understood the importance of supporting people with fluctuating capacity to make their own decisions wherever possible. During our visit, we observed staff seeking people's consent before providing support and before entering their personal space, demonstrating a respectful and person-centred approach.
Caring
There was a warm, relaxed and homely atmosphere throughout the service. People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff, and interactions were consistently kind, respectful and person-centred. Staff spoke positively about the people they supported and demonstrated a good understanding of their individual needs, preferences and what was important to them. One staff member told us, "Residents have choices that are respected".
Staff took time to get to know people and provided compassionate support that reflected their wishes and choices. We observed staff treating people with dignity and respect, supporting them in a patient and caring manner. The positive culture within the home extended to relationships between staff, with one staff member telling us, "We all look out for each other and are a good team".This contributed to a calm and welcoming environment and positive experiences for people living at the service.
People were supported to maintain their independence and make choices about their daily lives. The activity programme was adapted to reflect people's individual preferences, interests and wishes, enabling them to take part in activities that were meaningful to them. People chose how to spend their day, including what activities they wished to participate in and when they wanted to get up or go to bed. Staff respected people's decisions and supported them to remain in control of their lives.
People's rights to privacy, dignity and a personal life were respected, and they were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them. Visitors were welcomed without unnecessary restrictions, helping people stay connected with family and friends. Bedrooms were personalised with photographs, mementos and belongings that reflected people's interests, hobbies and life histories, helping to promote a sense of identity, comfort and belonging.
Responsive
People received personalised care that reflected their interests, preferences and individual choices. Staff demonstrated a flexible approach and adapted support to meet people's wishes and routines.
People had access to a range of meaningful activities and where appropriate opportunities to engage with their local community. Facilities within the home included a digital gaming table, cinema screen, computers, games and communal spaces for both social interaction and relaxation. One person who practiced religion had a calendar with daily religious quotes, a member of staff told us, “I make sure I read them to [the person] each day, I might not understand them, but they mean a lot to them.”
People were at the heart of decisions made about their care and support. Staff knew people well and delivered care in a way that reflected their individual needs and preferences. Families told us they were involved in their loved one's care and kept informed of any changes. One family member said, "They always let me know if there are any changes, or if something happens, they will always call me".This helped ensure care remained personalised and responsive to people's needs.
People were supported to express their views and were involved in decisions about the service. Regular resident meetings were held, providing opportunities for people to share feedback and contribute to decisions, including choosing charities to support. Information about menus, activities and how to raise concerns or complaints was displayed in accessible formats throughout the home.
People, relatives and staff told us they felt confident their views would be listened to and acted upon. The service viewed feedback, concerns and complaints as opportunities to improve the quality of care provided. This helped ensure people remained at the centre of service development and decisions affecting their daily lives.
The service promoted equality, diversity and inclusion. Policies and procedures reflected people's rights to equal opportunities, and these values were embedded within the aims and objectives of the service. Care plans demonstrated how people's individual needs, preferences, beliefs and protected characteristics were considered, ensuring they received personalised support and equitable access to care.
Well-Led
There was a positive and supportive culture within the service. Staff spoke positively about the home and demonstrated a commitment to providing compassionate, person-centred care. Relationships between staff and leaders were open and respectful, promoting trust and continuous improvement.
Daily handovers ensured important information about people and the running of the home was shared effectively across the staff team. This helped staff provide consistent care and support and promoted positive outcomes for people.
There was evidence of a stable staff team that didn’t rely on agency staff to cover shifts ensuring consistency for individuals living within the home. The registered manager told us that something they were proud of was, “Having an amazing team" adding that resident safety remained their priority. Staff feedback was overwhelmingly positive about the changes that had been introduced and the direction of the service, one told us, “The new manager observed practice and then implemented changes, they had been supportive and approachable from the beginning.”
The provider continued to develop governance systems, including the implementation of a digital care planning system to support oversight and improve record keeping. Staff and management demonstrated awareness of areas requiring further improvement, including aspects of the environment and maintenance, and had plans in place to address these.
Systems were also in place to support business continuity in the event of emergencies or adverse weather. Staff were aware of these arrangements and felt confident in their responsibilities, helping to ensure people could continue to receive safe and consistent care.
The service promoted a culture of learning and continuous improvement. The registered manager was committed to developing staff and recognised the value of their contribution to the quality and development of the service. Staff were supported to maintain and enhance their skills through training and development opportunities.
Systems and processes were being strengthened to ensure lessons were learned from incidents, feedback and day-to-day practice. The service welcomed feedback from people, relatives, staff and external partners and responded positively to suggestions for improvement. Where areas for development were identified, action was taken promptly to improve systems, practices and outcomes for people.