Leazes Hall Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 5 June 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 23 February to 16 April 2026.

Leazes Hall Care Home provides accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 50 people. At the time of our visit there were 47 people using the service. The service provides care and support to older people, some of whom were living with dementia; some people who used the service had a learning disability or were autistic. This assessment was carried out because of the length of time since our last inspection.

At the last assessment we rated the home good. At this assessment we found the home remained good.

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 that most people take for granted. The service was mostly meeting this guidance, but people’s individual care records could be improved to capture this better.

There were safe and robust recruitment processes. Medicines were managed safely, although the guidance for staff regarding ‘when required’ and topical medicines could be improved; action was being taken to address this. Infection prevention and control systems were effective. The provider had systems in place to ensure people were protected from abuse and harm and staff had completed safeguarding training. People lived in a safe environment. Health and safety checks were conducted regularly. The service had a homely and welcoming atmosphere.

People were supported by dedicated, compassionate and well-trained staff. Staff clearly knew people well and recognised changes in people’s needs, which resulted in referrals being made to external healthcare professionals in a timely manner. Staff worked in effective partnership with others to protect and promote people’s health and wellbeing. Care plans did not always contain consistent information on people's capacity and consent to their care; however, action was being taken to address this.

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew the people they supported well and had professional but close and friendly relationships with them. Staff supported people in a compassionate and caring way, which respected their decisions and choices. The provider was committed to workforce wellbeing, and staff told us they were happy working at the service.

People received person-centred care based on their assessed choices and needs. People and relatives felt listened to and involved in how the service was run. Staff supported people to access information effectively.

The registered manager was an experienced, effective and capable leader. Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and the rest of the management team. Some governance systems were in place to monitor and improve standards, but the provider’s oversight of the service needed to be captured more effectively. Staff were supported in their roles and spoke positively about the leadership of the home. There was a culture of continuous learning and improvement at the service.

Areas of minor improvement identified during this assessment were responded to either during the assessment or immediately afterwards. The registered manager demonstrated their responsiveness to our feedback and a desire to continually improve the service.