- Care home
Hansa Lodge
Assessment report published 22 July 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Hansa Lodge is a residential care home that provides personal care for up to 5 people with Learning Disabilities. At the time of the inspection 5 people lived at the service.
This is a specialist service for people with a physical disability, learning disability and autistic people. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence, and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
We carried out this assessment on 2 July 2026 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 if we found any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional 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. Staff and management worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.
People told us they felt safe with the staff and would feel comfortable in saying if they did not. A person said, “I do feel safe with the staff.” A relative told us, “I have no concerns about the staff or the home.” Records showed staff had undertaken training to support their knowledge and understanding of how to keep people safe. They knew of their responsibilities to protect people from harm.
Risks to people were assessed and management plans were in place to inform staff how to reduce and manage risks to maintain people’s safety. For example, we saw risk assessments had been undertaken for people who were at risk of falls.
The provider had a system to ensure all equipment was maintained and serviced. For example, we saw checks had been carried out on the electrical hard wiring and gas appliances.
A system was in place to record and monitor accidents and incidents within the service. The registered manager investigated all accidents and incidents, taking appropriate action to reduce the risk of recurrence and ensure people remained safe. We saw evidence that learning from incidents was embedded within the service, with appropriate actions identified, implemented, and monitored to improve safety and improve the quality of care.
The provider ensured people received their medicines on time and as prescribed. Staff completed a daily check to ensure people receive their medicines safely. This helped to identify any concerns and address any shortfalls.
There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to provide personalised care and support. People were supported by the same staff members unless the staff were on leave or not well. The provider did not use agency staff. This helped with consistency and continuity of care as staff were aware of the needs of people they were caring for.
Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of people’s individual needs, preferences, and personal circumstances, enabling them to develop positive, respectful, and trusting relationships.
The service promoted an open, inclusive, and person-centred culture. Staff, people using the service, relatives, and external professionals were actively encouraged to contribute to the ongoing development and continuous improvement of the service.
The provider maintained effective partnerships with the local community and relevant organisations, supporting a coordinated and collaborative approach to delivering high-quality care.
Robust quality assurance and governance systems were in place to monitor the quality, safety, and effectiveness of the service. These processes supported continuous learning, identified areas for improvement, and helped drive positive outcomes for people using the service.
People's experience of this service
People and their relatives were positive about the care and support provided by staff. They also said that the management team were approachable, accessible, and friendly.
People told us they were happy living at the service and with the support they received from staff. They were aware of how to raise any concerns or complaints with the service. A person said, “The staff are lovely.” A relative told us, “I am very happy with the care and support. The staff look after [Family member] very well, I can’t ask for more.”
People told us they felt safe using the service and were aware of who to talk to if they had any concerns. A person said, “I can talk to [registered manager] if I am not happy.” A relative told us, “The management team in the home is very good, they keep me informed of everything. I don’t have anything bad to say, they are always helpful.”
Throughout our visit, we saw staff as well as the registered manager interacted with people who used the service in a kind and courteous way. People were relaxed in the presence of staff and had built up good relationships with them.
The provider promoted the equality and diversity of people. They ensured people had equal opportunities, regardless of their abilities, their background or their lifestyle. For example, people had equal access to activities considering their individual circumstances. A person mentioned that they visited their place of worship regularly.
People were encouraged to exercise choices on how they wanted to be supported. A person told us, “I can choose what I like to eat.” People and relatives were involved in planning and reviews of the care and support being provided by staff.
Staff ensured people knew what they were going to do. They took time to explain to people and ensure they understood what they were saying before undertaking any care task.
Staff encouraged people to maintain their independence as much as possible, in all aspects of life and daily activity. For example, people were encouraged to help with certain jobs within the service. We saw what people were able to do independently were recorded in their care plans.
People received personalised care and support that was tailored to their individual needs. We found people’s care plans gave sufficient instructions to staff on how to deliver care and support to people in accordance with their wishes. The care plans were reviewed and updated regularly or when the need arose. Any changes in people's needs were recorded and discussed during staff handovers. This helped to ensure people who used the service received the care and support they needed.
People were encouraged and supported to pursue their interests and maintain links with the community. Staff supported people to stay in touch with their relatives and to maintain relationships with the people who mattered to them. Relatives told us they could visit their loved ones at any time and were always made welcome.
The registered manager operated an open-door policy where people, relatives and staff were able to discuss any issues they might have. This helped to ensure the service ran smoothly. People told us they were able to speak with the registered manager at any time. There were regular meetings for staff where they had opportunities to discuss any issues or share any ideas. There were meetings held for people as well where they were given opportunities to discuss any concerns they might have.
The registered manager kept themselves up to date with best practice. They attended meetings run by local authorities or networking events. The provider had other services and the registered managers met on a regular basis to share ideas on how they could improve their services further.
The registered manager worked closely with other health and social care professionals to ensure the people received the care and support they needed. Records showed they had regular contact with multi-disciplinary teams to discuss people’s on-going needs or to seek advice.