Loyd House

Updated 9 October 2025

This assessment started on 29 October 2025 and ended on 18 November 2025

We assessed all quality statements from safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led key questions. The overall rating of the service was required improvement.

Loyds House is a care home that supports people with acquired brain injuries. The service is registered to support people with personal care, nursing care and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. At the time of this assessment, they were supporting 14 people with regulated activities of all ages. CQC only inspect the services received by people who are receiving regulated activities. We spoke with 6 people and 7 relatives, 13 staff including the management team, therapy team, care staff and domestic staff.

We found 4 breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, good governance, consent, and person-centred care. Care plans lacked specific details and guidance for staff about people’s individual support needs, and in some cases contained incorrect information. Risk assessments were not always in place. Medicine management and administration required improvements.Lack of oversight prevented the identification of themes or trends, limiting the ability to take action to mitigate risks or learn from events.

Quality monitoring processes did not identify the concerns we found during this assessment.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.

Updated 9 October 2025

People told us they felt safe at Loyd House Care Home. One person told us,” Yes and well cared for. I like it here quite a lot.” A relative told us, “Yes. There is a couple of members of staff there that really care and know (relative) and that makes a difference.” Most people and their relatives told us their needs were met. We received mixed feedback regarding staffing numbers, cleanliness of the home and how responsive staff were to their needs. One person told us,” Sometimes we are short-staffed - usually if someone says we can’t go out then we are short staffed.” There were no daily activities despite residents requesting more during meetings. Whilst some people engaged in activities with the therapy team, these were not provided daily. One person told us,” They sometimes run activities in the home - having a Halloween event here and elf day at Christmas.” Another told us, “They don’t, but they're always open to suggestions, I think.” There was a complaints process in place and people, and their relatives told us they would be confident to make a complaint if required. One relative told us.” Yes, I would go either to the Duty manager or manager. When I have done, I always get a response.”

Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. We used observations to assess whether they received good care.

Although people were mainly happy with the service this assessment found elements of care that did not meet expected standards.