Rated Care Homes

Derwent Lodge

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 3 ratings

    Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.

  • 2 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 17 of 63

    rated care homes in Derby are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Derwent Lodge: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 16 beds, Derby

Rated Requires improvement in August 2026, down from Good.

Derwent Lodge: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Derwent View (Outstanding, 0.1 miles away) and 24 St Marks Road (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Derwent View Outstanding, 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    24 St Marks Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    26 St Marks Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  4. G
  5. G
    Castle Park Good, 0.7 miles away

See all care homes in Derby

See all care homes in Chaddesden

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 3 August 2026 (assessment visit 20 March 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 1 June 2026 to 10 June 2026.

The service is a nursing home providing personal care and support to adults whose primary need was support with their mental health. The service supported 14 people though 3 of those people were in hospital at the time of the assessment.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective No rating
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

The last full ratings assessment of Derwent Lodge was published 6 July 2018; the overall rating was Good. At this assessment the overall rating for Derwent Lodge is Requires Improvement. This is based upon the findings at this assessment.

This assessment was carried out due to the length of time since the last rating.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

People were not always protected from avoidable harm. Infection prevention and control practices were not consistently effective, and environmental risks relating to maintenance had not been adequately managed. These issues demonstrated that risks were not always assessed, mitigated or monitored effectively and resulted in a breach of Regulation 12 (Safe care and treatment).

Not all requested staff recruitment records were provided within timescales set at the assessment. This meant that we could not be assured that staff were employed following safe recruitment processes and resulted in a breach of Regulation 19 (Fit and proper persons employed).

Governance systems were not sufficiently effective to identify and address risks and drive improvement. Although audits and monitoring processes were in place, these had not identified and addressed the issues found during the assessment, including concerns relating to infection control, environmental safety and care planning. This meant risks were not always recognised or acted upon in a timely way, placing people at ongoing risk of harm, and resulted in a breach of Regulation 17 (Good governance).

The effectiveness of care and treatment was inconsistent. While people were supported with nutrition and hydration and staff worked with external healthcare professionals, care was not always delivered in line with best practice. Monitoring of a health condition was not consistent and systems to support people to manage their health, including for a person with a learning disability, required improvement. This meant there was a risk that deterioration in people’s health might not always be identified or managed promptly.

People generally experienced kind, compassionate and respectful care. Feedback from people and relatives was positive and staff were observed providing support in a caring way. People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence.

While people were generally supported to access activities and express their views, some aspects of the service required further development to ensure care was consistently responsive. Care plans did not consistently include sufficient detail about people’s preferences, life histories and what was important to them, meaning care was not always tailored to individual needs. Information was not always provided in accessible formats, particularly for a person with additional communication needs, which limited their ability to fully understand and engage with their care.

There were positive aspects to leadership and culture. Staff described management as approachable and felt able to speak up, and there was evidence of partnership working with external professionals to support people’s care and continuity. However, oversight arrangements were not sufficiently robust to ensure sustained improvement or consistent delivery of safe, effective and person-centred care.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and fit and proper persons employed.

  2. Effective

    No rating

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant that the governance processes did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 3 August 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Requires improvement on 3 August 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 3 August 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  4. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.

Registration details

Registered manager
Sophie Poyser
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Mental Health

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

7 inspection reports, latest 10 March 2022. Latest assessment published 3 August 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Provider
Rethink Mental IllnessBrand: Rethink
Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
01227970 (opens Companies House)
Charity number
271028

Rethink Mental Illness runs 14 services in England, 2 of them in the East Midlands. 8 are rated Good or Outstanding and 6 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.

Other services run by Rethink Mental Illness

  1. G
    148 Hornsey Lane Good. Care home, Islington, London
  2. G
    Albany House - Stratford-upon-Avon Good. Care home, Warwickshire, West Midlands
  3. G
    Bath Road Good. Care home, Swindon, South West
  4. G
    Doncaster Crisis Accommodation and Helpline Good. Care home, Doncaster, Yorkshire and the Humber

See all 14 services run by Rethink Mental Illness

Getting help from Derby City Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Derwent Lodge provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Derwent Lodge as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Derwent Lodge have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 16 beds at Derwent Lodge.
When was Derwent Lodge last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Derwent Lodge was published on 3 August 2026.
Who runs Derwent Lodge?
Derwent Lodge is run by Rethink Mental Illness. It runs 14 services in England, 2 of them in the East Midlands.
What is Derwent Lodge's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 3 August 2026.

Contact

Phone
01332 347597
Address
11 Beaufort Street, Chaddesden, Derby, DE21 6AX Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Derwent View (Outstanding, 0.1 miles away) and 24 St Marks Road (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Derwent View Outstanding, 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    24 St Marks Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    26 St Marks Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  4. G
  5. G
    Castle Park Good, 0.7 miles away

See all care homes in Derby

See all care homes in Chaddesden