Moorleigh Nursing Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 31 March 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: We visited the home on 11 February, 18 February and 26 February and continued to review evidence remotely. The service is a nursing home providing support to older people living with dementia, nursing needs, sensory impairments and physical disabilities.

Staff demonstrated a positive learning culture, supported by proactive incident reporting and reflective practice. People told us they felt safe, and safeguarding arrangements were robust.

Staff worked collaboratively with external professionals to support people to live healthier lives. Consent was obtained appropriately, and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Care supported positive outcomes and quality of life. People’s needs were assessed and reviewed regularly; however, people and their relatives were not always fully involved in reviewing care plans.

Staff told us they felt supported and empowered to speak up, and diversity and inclusion were actively promoted. The provider demonstrated a clear commitment to learning and innovation.

Staff knew people well, and care was person centred‑. Care plans were sufficiently detailed to guide consistent and safe support.

The environment was clean; however, several areas, particularly bathrooms, toilets and the satellite kitchen required renovation and refurbishment.

Although staffing levels met the required numbers, many people required two to one support, which reduced the time staff were able to spend engaging meaningfully with people.

Although the activity coordinator made a positive impact, their limited contracted hours reduced opportunities for people to participate in regular, meaningful activities.

People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Care was personalised, and people were supported to express their identity and preferences. Staff were attentive to immediate needs, and workforce wellbeing was prioritised.

Medicines were not always managed safely, and infection prevention and control measures were not consistently followed.

Leadership was visible and effective, and there was a culture of learning and continuous improvement. Governance systems were in place; however, they did not consistently identify gaps in medicines management or infection prevention and control.

Communication was inclusive, and feedback was actively sought to drive improvement.

We identified breaches of regulation in relation to safe and effective treatment, premises and equipment and good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns we found during this assessment.