Rated Care Homes

Aarandale Lodge

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 4 ratings

    Rated Good at every inspection since 2015.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 67 of 76

    rated care homes in Southend-on-Sea are rated Good, like this one.

Aarandale Lodge: inspection record

Care home, 20 beds, Southend-on-Sea

Rated Good in July 2026.

Aarandale 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

  1. G
    Milton House Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. G
  3. G
    St George's House Good, 0.2 miles away
  4. G
    Blakeney House Good, 0.2 miles away
  5. –
    Melrose House Not yet rated, 0.2 miles away

See all care homes in Southend-on-Sea

See all care homes in Central Southend-on-Sea

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 20 July 2026 (assessment visit 26 June 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

About the service

Aarandale Lodge is a residential care home providing personal care without nursing for up to 20 people. At the time of inspection 19 people were using the service. The service is set over two floors in the local community with access to a large garden.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Who the service is for

The service supports older people and people living with dementia.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on the 26 June until the 2 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. New staff underwent a through recruitment process and a full induction programme. Staff were supported by the manager and given training appropriate to their role. Staff told us they had been supported to complete nationally recognised training courses. People were given their medicines as prescribed and were safeguarded from the risk of abuse by staff who understood their responsibilities to report concerns. Records we saw showed us the registered manager reported safeguarding concerns to the local authority safeguarding team and worked with them to ensure people were safe.

Risk assessments were in place to help staff mitigate risks of harm to people whilst maintaining their independence. A member of staff said, “We promote people’s independence to live their best possible life, whilst keeping them safe.” A relative told us, “Staff have put alarm pads in place, so they know if [person name] is trying to mobilise without support. This has worked to stop any falls.”
The provider employed maintenance staff to keep the building in a good state of repair. Where major works had needed to be completed such as replacing fire doors this had been done. Staff had received training in infection prevention control practices and had personal protective equipment available for them to use.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

Care was person centred and assessments of people’s needs were completed before they started using the service. People were supported to maintain hydration and eat a varied diet. We saw people were given choice over the food and drink they had and staff monitored they achieved recommended amounts of fluid intake where needed. People were referred to speech and language therapist for assessments when issues were identified and specialist diets were provided when needed.

We observed staff had positive relationships with people and were kind and caring towards people. The provider and registered manager promoted equality in experience and outcome for people. The registered manager had systems in place to measure and monitor outcomes for people, including surveys on meal experiences and surveys on people’s experience of living at the service. Staff held regular 1:1 meetings with people to gain their feedback and address any concerns. People told us if they had any complaints, they would raise these with the registered manager.

The registered manager had systems in place to keep a good oversight of the service. Staff communicated well together and shared ideas or lessons learned in staff meetings and during supervision.
Staff shared the registered managers and providers vision to provide good care to people with positive outcomes. One member of staff said, “We want people to enjoy the rest of their lives, to be as independent, safe and happy as possible.”

  1. Safe

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained a 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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.
  2. Visit at different times of day, including a mealtime.

Registration details

Registered manager
Susan Brown
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People

Inspection report

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

6 inspection reports, latest 18 February 2021. Latest assessment published 20 July 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

Ownership type
Partnership

Mrs Aunjali Johar & Mr Navneet Singh Johar runs 2 services, all in the East of England. 2 are rated Good or Outstanding.

Other services run by Mrs Aunjali Johar & Mr Navneet Singh Johar

  1. G
    Astral Lodge Residential Home Good. Care home, Southend-on-Sea

Getting help from Southend-on-Sea 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 Aarandale Lodge provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Aarandale Lodge as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Aarandale Lodge have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 20 beds at Aarandale Lodge.
When was Aarandale Lodge last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Aarandale Lodge was published on 20 July 2026.
Who runs Aarandale Lodge?
Aarandale Lodge is run by Mrs Aunjali Johar & Mr Navneet Singh Johar. It runs 2 services, all in the East of England.
What is Aarandale Lodge's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 20 July 2026.

Contact

Phone
01702 352096
Address
2-4 St Vincent's Road, Westcliff On Sea, SS0 7PR Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Milton House Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. G
  3. G
    St George's House Good, 0.2 miles away
  4. G
    Blakeney House Good, 0.2 miles away
  5. –
    Melrose House Not yet rated, 0.2 miles away

See all care homes in Southend-on-Sea

See all care homes in Central Southend-on-Sea