Eden Lodge

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 12 June 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 18 May – to 4 June 2026. Eden Lodge is a residential care home providing personal care and support to adults with learning disabilities and/or autistic people. People visit the service for short term respite stays. We assessed the service due to the age of the rating and the time since our last inspection. At the time of this assessment there were 6 people living in the service. As part of this assessment, we reviewed all key questions and quality statements. The outcome of this assessment was a rating for the service. We 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 most people take for granted. We were assured the service provided care in line with this guidance.

Members of staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed to identify any trends or learning. The provider shared concerns about safety quickly and appropriately with the local safeguarding adults team. People were safe in the service. Care plans were person-centred and detailed. Risks were assessed and mitigated appropriately. People’s care and was delivered in line with their care plans. Members of staff were deployed effectively throughout the service. Recruitment processes were safe and the provider had an active recruitment process in place to manage vacancies effectively. The provider made sure medicines were managed safely.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met appropriately. Menus were planned around people’s likes and dislikes and people could choose what they wanted to eat and where they wanted to eat it. Members of staff supported people to live healthier lives and, where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People’s capacity to consent to care was assessed and recorded in their care plans. Assessments were decision-specific in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Code of Practice.

Members of staff were kind and caring. They knew the people they supported. The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. The service supported people to make their own choices and live their life as they wanted. We observed people making choices and decisions. The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. The staff team told us they felt well supported by the management team and the provider.

People’s care plans were person-centred and reflected their likes, dislikes and preferences about care and support. The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs. The care environment displayed information in a range of different formats including easy-read and photos. The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Members of staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The registered manager had developed good partnership links with a local arts group to support different ways of engagement and involvement of people who used the service.

There was a positive, caring atmosphere in the service. Members of staff were clear about the values of the service and were committed to providing a high quality, good service for people. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. The registered manager supported and empowered members of staff to lead the service and make decisions about people’s care and support. The registered manager carried out regular checks of the care environment but did not always record them. We discussed this with the registered manager and identified an opportunity for learning and continuous service improvement. 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 focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.