Leyland Lodge

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 17 December 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 16 June 2025 to 30 June 2025. Leyland Lodge is a residential care home, providing accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. The service can provide support for up to 23 people, younger adults mostly with a history or drug and alcohol abuse. At the time of our assessment, 14 people were living at the home.

This unannounced inspection was carried out to review the quality of care and compliance with the legal regulations.

Staff had a good understanding of incidents and accidents, and information was shared amongst the team about lessons learnt. The provider ensured that fire safety systems were in place, and appropriate health and safety checks were followed. Staff had access to ongoing training and support, and recruitment processes were robust. The home was found to be clean, and medication was managed safely.

The provider had a digital recording system to plan and record people’s care, and regular reviews were carried out. Staff received guidance and support to enable them to deliver care in line with current best practice. Information about people was shared with staff and the relevant healthcare partners, and people were supported to manage their health and improve their outcomes.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and supported effectively.There were good records of food and fluid intake as well as a good range of food on offer. Staff confirmed that they prepare alternative meals if a person does not wish to eat what was previously planned with them.

Staff were kind and caring and took the time to communicate with people, treating them as individuals.

People’s communication needs were met, and the home was accessible with a large communal area and well maintained outside space. Some people were unable to communicate verbally, but staff had a good knowledge of their needs and supported them effectively through other communication methods.

There was a positive, compassionate culture at the service and staff confirmed there were opportunities for them to speak up. There was evidence of regular staff supervision, staff meetings and resident meetings. The registered manager, deputy manager and staff had worked hard to continuously raise standards and enhance people’s quality of life. Staff members told us that the management team were very supportive.

However, we were not fully assured staffing levels fully met people’s needs, staff told us there were supposed to be 5 staff on each day but that this was not always the case.Information relating to people’s care needs and associated risks was not always correct or consistent. We found an example of contradictory information in a care plan and noted that risk assessments were not always completed when risks had been identified in care plans.

Assessments of people’s capacity were not consistently completed.