Rated Care Homes

Cherry Lodge

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 7 ratings

    First rated Requires improvement in 2015, most recently Requires improvement in August 2025.

  • 14 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 54 of 245

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

Cherry Lodge: inspection record

Care home, 46 beds, Birmingham

Rated Requires improvement in August 2025.

Cherry 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: Tandy Court (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Maycroft (Good, 0.2 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Tandy Court Good, 0.2 miles away
  2. G
    Maycroft Good, 0.2 miles away
  3. G
    Manningford Good, 0.3 miles away
  4. –
    Joseph House Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Maypole Grove Good, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Birmingham

See all care homes in Brandwood End

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 21 August 2025 (assessment visit 6 May 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: 28 May 2025 to 11 July 2025. The assessment was prompted by reviewing information we held about the service and concerns raised with us about the safety of people at the service. Cherry Lodge is a care home, providing accommodation and personal care for up to 46 older adults, many living with dementia or who have mental health needs. At the time of our assessment site visits, there were 46 people living at the service.

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

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to person centred care and governance. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

The environment was not always effectively maintained. We found on-going general maintenance repairs with, for example, some fire doors, radiator covers, unlagged hot water pipes and 2 windows without restrictors. The provider took immediate action to rectify some of these issues and repairs commenced during the time we were on site.

We found there had been some improvements made to the governance systems and audits in place to monitor the safety and quality of the care being provided. However, these new processes were not yet embedded into practice and had not identified the issues we found at this assessment.

We found the monitoring and recording of some medicines was identified as an area for some improvement, although, the overall management and administration of medication was safe. There had also been some positive additional improvements made at the service. Care plans were person centred and risk assessments contained instructions for staff on how to support people safely. There were some discrepancies between some care plans and risk assessments, however these were immediately addressed on the day. There had been an improvement to supporting people in their daily activities to meet their individual needs or preferences. Overall, staff had received appropriate training to support them in their roles; with the exception of training for sepsis which was immediately addressed by the registered manager. Generally, staff had been employed following a safe recruitment process. However this was not always consistent and there were areas, such as obtaining references and addressing gaps in employment history, that could be improved upon.

The provider had safeguarding processes to keep people safe. Incidents, accidents and complaints had been investigated and learning shared with staff to make improvements. There had been improvements made to mental capacity assessments being decision specific and completed in people’s best interests when supporting people to have some choice and control of their lives.

  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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

  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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 21 August 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 21 August 2025. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment

Inspection report

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

7 inspection reports, latest 27 January 2024. Latest assessment published 21 August 2025; 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
Organisation
Companies House number
05200924 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Birmingham 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 Cherry Lodge provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Cherry Lodge as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Cherry Lodge have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 46 beds at Cherry Lodge.
When was Cherry Lodge last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Cherry Lodge was published on 21 August 2025.
Who runs Cherry Lodge?
Cherry Lodge is run by Care First Class (UK) Limited.
What is Cherry Lodge's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 21 August 2025.

Contact

Address
6 Manningford Road, Druids Heath, Birmingham, B14 5LD Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Tandy Court (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Maycroft (Good, 0.2 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Tandy Court Good, 0.2 miles away
  2. G
    Maycroft Good, 0.2 miles away
  3. G
    Manningford Good, 0.3 miles away
  4. –
    Joseph House Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Maypole Grove Good, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Birmingham

See all care homes in Brandwood End