Hunter's Lodge

The atmosphere in the home was welcoming, and people appeared comfortable and relaxed in their surroundings. Staff mostly responded calmly and with patience, reflecting their familiarity with people’s individual needs. There was clear evidence of warm relationships between people and staff. Feedback from relatives was mostly positive, and stakeholders also expressed positive views, indicating people were well supported. The environment was clean, well-maintained and adapted to meet both general and individual needs, providing a positive and enjoyable setting for people to live in.

People’s health needs were monitored, and action was taken when changes were identified. Best interest decisions involved relevant people and were documented in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2025.

The provider had audit systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Staff knew people well and demonstrated a good understanding of their individual needs and preferences. However, audits did not always identify some charts were consistently fully populated, which meant the provider did not always have full oversight of how interventions were being monitored and reviewed. This was raised with the registered manager, who took prompt action to address the issue and improve recording and oversight.

People told us they felt safe and protected from harm and abuse. Staff had received relevant training, and the provider had robust recruitment processes in place to ensure staff were recruited safely.

People were supported to maintain relationships with those who mattered to them, and relatives could visit the home freely. The provider had strong connections with the wider community. However, individual activity plans were under review at the time of inspection, and no activities were observed to be taking place during our visit. This was also reflected in the feedback we received from relatives.

Staffing levels met required numbers, and a dependency tool was used to assess staffing in line with people’s support needs. The service benefited from a consistent team of staff. People spoke positively about staff. However, observations and feedback from relatives indicated, at times, staff deployment resulted in limited staff presence on the floor to support people.

Complaints were taken seriously and investigated thoroughly. People and their relatives told us they felt confident concerns could be raised and appropriate action would be taken.

The provider had systems and processes in place to assess safety, manage risk and monitor quality.

Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff followed appropriate procedures for ordering, storing, administering and recording medicines, and records reviewed were accurate and up to date. Regular checks and audits were carried out to ensure good practice was maintained, and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities in relation to medicines management.

People were supported to have a choice of meals and drinks, with options available to meet their preferences.

People’s communication needs were assessed and planned for, with information provided in a range of formats to meet individual requirements. Regular resident meetings were in place to support involvement in the service, enabling people to share feedback and make suggestions.

People had access to a sensory garden, which provided a calm and stimulating outdoor environment. This area supported people’s wellbeing by offering opportunities for relaxation, sensory engagement and meaningful activity, particularly benefiting those living with dementia. Staff encouraged people to use the garden, helping to promote independence and enhance quality of life.