Earlfield Lodge

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 22 May 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 21 April to 8 May 2026. Earlfield Lodge is a residential home providing accommodation and personal care for older adults and people living with dementia. At our last assessment, we rated this service overall as requires improvement. At this assessment, we rated this service overall as good. The service can accommodate up to 35 adults. At the time of the assessment 15 people were living at the service. We carried out this assessment due to the previous rating and to follow up on our enforcement action. We assessed 33 quality statements in safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations of person-centred care, safe care and treatment, premises and equipment, good governance and fit and proper persons employed. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations. The provider had complied with the enforced conditions imposed at our last assessment. The provider had sent regular reports to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) which demonstrated improvements made at the service.

Improvements had been made at the service to make and embed changes. Staff were now recruited safely. Significant improvements had been made to the environment to ensure Earlfield Lodge was a pleasant place to live. This included internal refurbishments, a secure outdoor space, the smoking area being relocated and enclosing hot water pipes to mitigate risks. People’s care plans now contained person centred information. This included people’s life histories, preferences and wishes. This supported staff in knowing people well and what was important to them. The office had been relocated to the ground floor by the entrance to the service, which improved visibility of management and better oversight of the service.

The provider had an action plan which identified and monitored ongoing improvements still required. Risk management required review to ensure direction was specific and accurate. Learning from incidents, accidents and safeguarding concerns needed to be fully effective. The fire risk assessment was being reviewed, along with people’s emergency plans. Complaints were not systematically recorded. Mental capacity assessments were being reviewed to ensure they were decision specific. The provider was working on developing the service’s values and partnerships. Governance systems had improved and were being further refined to ensure continual progress at the service.

People’s medicines were managed safely and were given as prescribed. The home was clean and tidy and supported infection risk management. A pre assessment was conducted to ensure the service could meet people’s needs. People received effective and responsive care. The service worked with health professionals and escalated concerns appropriately. People were supported to manage and improve their health and well-being. Health and social care professionals gave positive feedback about the service and care delivered. Staff received an induction to the home and ongoing training.

People were supported by caring staff who treated them as individuals and supported their independence. People were treated with dignity and respect. The home had a consistent team who knew people well. People were supported to plan and share preferences around their end of life wishes. The home had received a number of compliments and feedback about the service was encouraged. People had choices about how they spent their time. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were applied for when appropriate