Henley Lodge

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 24 June 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 25 March 2025. The service is a residential service providing care and support mainly to people living with mental health conditions. This comprehensive assessment was partly prompted by inherent risks due to concerns we received about the provider. While the service is also a specialist service for autistic people or people with a learning disability, it was not used by anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person at the time of the assessment. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.

The provider had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly and took necessary remedial actions when needed. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks to people’s health, care and safety. The facilities met people’s needs, were clean and well-maintained. Managers made sure staff received training and appropriate support to maintain high-quality care. People received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff involved people in the assessment of their needs. People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving between services. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living.

Staff treated people as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and were involved to make decisions about their care. The provider supported staff wellbeing. The service was accessible to people and staff provided them with fair and equal care.

Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles, and focused in improving the service. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated fairly. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and worked in partnership with other organisations to provide effective care to people.

However, improvements were needed in certain areas. There were days where staffing levels were not sufficient and people did not have access to the appropriate staff. Information on people’s mental capacity was not always clearly recorded. Quality assurance checks lacked details in some areas.