Rated Care Homes

Welshwood Manor

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 8 ratings

    Its last inspection improved it from Inadequate to Requires improvement.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 56 of 361

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

Welshwood Manor: inspection record

Care home, 34 beds, Essex

Rated Requires improvement in July 2026, up from Inadequate.

Welshwood Manor: 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: Butterfly's Care Home (Good, 0.5 miles away) and Milton Lodge Retirement Home (Good, 0.9 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Butterfly's Care Home Good, 0.5 miles away
  2. –
    Duncannons Not yet rated, 0.7 miles away
  3. RI
    St Fillans Care Home Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away
  4. G
    Milton Lodge Retirement Home Good, 0.9 miles away
  5. G
    Gables Good, 1 mile away

See all care homes in Essex

See all care homes in Fox Street

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 11 July 2026 (assessment visit 30 April 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Inspection: 11 May 2026 to 19 June 2026. On site visits took place on 11 May 2026 and 2 June 2026.

Welshwood Manor is a care home providing personal care for up to 37 people. At the time of the inspection, 20 older people lived at the service. This inspection was carried out to follow up on the previous inadequate rating and to see if the necessary improvements had been made.

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

A new manager had been employed since the last inspection. Overall, there were signs of improvement under the leadership of a new manager, however, we also found continued concerns regarding the safety culture and governance.

While the manager was actively attempting to improve the service, systems for monitoring, analysing, and learning from incidents remained insufficiently robust, posing potential risk of harm. Significant risks were identified in the management of choking risks including failures to follow guidance and a lack of staff training. Although the manager took swift action to address these issues during the inspection, these risks had not been identified through existing systems.

Safeguarding processes were in place and concerns were shared appropriately.

At last inspection we were concerned that the care environment was unsafe. We found some improvements at this inspection, however, there remained unsecure external areas, hazardous sheds, and unresolved fire safety concerns.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs, and staff were observed to be caring and responsive; however, there were gaps in staff training and recruitment checks. Medicines were generally managed safely, although there were inconsistencies in recording people’s capacity.

While staff interactions were generally kind and responsive in the moment, the service did not consistently promote dignity, individuality, or person-centred care, with practice still influenced by routine rather than personal choice. Some people were still supported with personal care very early in the morning for staff convenience.

There were also a number of improvements. People’s needs were assessed appropriately, and social engagement had also increased. Leadership showed early positive change, with a new manager described as approachable and committed to improvement. Staff morale and teamwork had improved, and there was evidence of a more open culture where people felt able to speak up. However, leadership oversight and governance still required improvement with ineffective audits failing to identify serious risks, a lack of provider-level oversight, and insufficient support structures.

This service has been in Special Measures since 12 January 2026. The provider demonstrated some improvements had been made and this was clearly a work in progress. The service is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures, however, not all breaches of the Regulations had been met. The service remained in breach of Regulations Dignity and Respect Safe Care and treatment and Good Governance at this inspection.

  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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

  2. 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.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires Improvement: This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

  3. Caring

    No rating

    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 remained requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to dignity and respect.

  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 remained requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

  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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant that the governance processes 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

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 11 July 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Requires improvement on 11 July 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Caring was rated Requires improvement on 11 July 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
  4. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 11 July 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.

Registration details

Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Older People, Physical Disability, Younger Adults

Inspection report

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

8 inspection reports, latest 2 June 2023. Latest assessment published 11 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
Organisation
Companies House number
03713056 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Essex County 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 Welshwood Manor provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Welshwood Manor as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Welshwood Manor have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 34 beds at Welshwood Manor.
When was Welshwood Manor last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Welshwood Manor was published on 11 July 2026.
Who runs Welshwood Manor?
Welshwood Manor is run by Davard Care Homes Limited.
What is Welshwood Manor's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 11 July 2026.

Contact

Phone
01206 868483
Address
37 Welshwood Park Road, Colchester, CO4 3HZ Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Butterfly's Care Home (Good, 0.5 miles away) and Milton Lodge Retirement Home (Good, 0.9 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Butterfly's Care Home Good, 0.5 miles away
  2. –
    Duncannons Not yet rated, 0.7 miles away
  3. RI
    St Fillans Care Home Requires improvement, 0.7 miles away
  4. G
    Milton Lodge Retirement Home Good, 0.9 miles away
  5. G
    Gables Good, 1 mile away

See all care homes in Essex

See all care homes in Fox Street