Rook Lodge
Care home, Redbridge, 10 beds
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
Rook Lodge: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in September 2026, down from Good.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
Inspected and rated 3 times since 2016. Rated Good in 2016 and 2018, then Requires improvement in September 2026.
Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement. The latest rating was published 1 month ago.
How it compares locally
- One of 10 Requires improvement care homes in Redbridge, out of 71 with a rating.
- About the middle for size in Redbridge.
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 10 September 2026 (assessment visit 12 August 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 30 June to 14 July 2026. Rook lodge is a care home. It provides care and support for people with long-term mental health illnesses. At the time of the inspection, there were 8 people using the service.
This was a comprehensive assessment and included all the quality statements across our five key questions. This is the first assessment for this registered service. At this assessment the service has been rated requires improvement.
Read the full summary
The provider did not work well with people to understand and manage risks. Staff did not always complete risk assessment forms in full, to ensure they contained sufficient detail in the required areas. Where risk management plans were in place, these were not detailed enough to ensure staff had all the necessary information to deliver safe care and support to people.
Staff were not supported through regular supervision, annual appraisals, or spot checks to assess their knowledge, skills, and competence. This meant the provider could not be assured that staff were receiving appropriate support, monitoring, and opportunities to develop and maintain the skills required to carry out their roles safely.
The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. This meant there was no robust approach for assessing the effectiveness of people’s care, support and appropriate actions were not always taken to improve outcomes. People's needs were not always fully assessed to ensure their physical, mental health, sensory, and social needs were identified and accurately reflected in their care and support plans.
The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and support. Care plans did not always include signatures from people to evidence consent had been sought before care and support were provided. There was no effective system of record keeping in place. Care plans and risk assessments were not regularly updated to reflect changes in people’s health needs, which may impact the quality and continuity of care.
However, people knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The care people received was easy for them to access and the service worked to eliminate discrimination. People received care that was fair with equal treatment. Reasonable adjustments were made to ensure equal access to the service for all.
The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. People reported they felt safe with staff and were aware of who to contact if they had any concerns regarding abuse or neglect. The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Staff told us they felt valued and were treated in a way that supported their wellbeing.
The provider took prompt and appropriate improvement actions in response to the concerns identified during this assessment.
We found 2 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
-
Safe
No rating
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated 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 people’s safe care and treatment and staffing.
-
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. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated required improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
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.
This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated 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.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 10 September 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 10 September 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 10 September 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
Contact and registration details
| Address | 1-6 Wanstead Lane, Ilford, IG1 3UB |
|---|---|
| Neighbourhood | Wanstead, Redbridge |
| Phone | 020 8518 0740 |
| Registered manager | Elizabeth O'Donovan |
| Registered with the CQC since | |
| What it provides |
|
| Who it supports |
|
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
| Provider | Certitude Trading LimitedBrand: Certitude |
|---|---|
| Ownership type | Organisation |
| Companies House number | 14991207 (opens Companies House) |
Certitude Trading Limited runs 11 services in London. 7 are rated Good or Outstanding, 3 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate and 1 has no rating yet.
Other services run by Certitude Trading Limited
- G 138 All Saints Road Care home, MertonGood
- G 2-3 Orchard Close Care home, RedbridgeGood
- G 83 Glengall Road Care home, RedbridgeGood
- G Granville Road Care home, HaringeyGood
- G Green Lodge Care home with nursing, RedbridgeGood
- G Helena Road Care home, NewhamGood
Nearest alternatives
- G Beehive Care home, 0.7 miles awayGood
- G MIG House Residential Care Homes Care home, 0.7 miles awayGood
- G Seymour Gardens Care home, 0.8 miles awayGood
- G The Beeches (The Drive) Care home, 0.8 miles awayGood
- G Sahara House Care home, 0.8 miles awayGood
Getting help from London Borough of Redbridge
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at London Borough of Redbridge
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0208 708 7333
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: London Borough of Redbridge
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Rook Lodge provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Rook Lodge as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Rook Lodge have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 10 beds at Rook Lodge.
- When was Rook Lodge last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Rook Lodge was published on 10 September 2026.
- Who runs Rook Lodge?
- Rook Lodge is run by Certitude Trading Limited. It runs 11 services in London.
- What is Rook Lodge's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 10 September 2026.