Lyndhurst Residential Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 25 November 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 28 October and 30 October 2025. The service is a residential home providing support to older people who may be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection 14 people were living at the home.

The provider did not always ensure a consistently safe environment. Risks in the physical environment, such as uncovered radiators and poor cleanliness, were not identified through governance systems. The service was in breach of regulations in relation to premises and equipment and governance. Some risk assessments lacked detail and did not consistently reflect people’s capacity or preferences. Medicines were generally well managed, but minor issues were found. Staffing levels were appropriate, and infection control practices were mostly robust, although some areas required further cleaning. Safeguarding was taken seriously, and staff were confident in reporting concerns.

Staff assessed needs effectively and worked with other healthcare professionals to deliver evidence-based care. Nutrition and hydration needs were met, and people were supported to live healthier lives. However, some care plans lacked detail around specific health conditions and consent documentation did not always reflect people’s abilities. Staff worked well together and monitored outcomes to improve care.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence. Staff responded to people’s immediate needs and created a calm, friendly atmosphere. People felt cared for and described staff as compassionate. Staff wellbeing was promoted, and there was a culture of teamwork and mutual respect.

Care was person-centred and met people’s needs. Staff listened to people and involved them in decisions. While care plans required improvement in person-centred detail, staff knew people well and responded to feedback. People had access to information and were supported to plan for the future. Equity in access and outcomes was promoted, and staff respected people’s backgrounds and preferences.

Leadership was visible. However, governance systems did not always identify risks or areas for improvement. While staff described the home as a “little family” and felt supported, audits failed to pick up environmental and care planning concerns. Leaders were compassionate and inclusive, and there was a culture of openness. The provider was responsive to feedback and had taken action to address concerns raised during the inspection.