Rated Care Homes

Elizabeth House

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 4 ratings

    Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.

  • 9 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 5 of 54

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

Elizabeth House: inspection record

Care home, 20 beds, Solihull

Rated Requires improvement in January 2026, down from Good.

Elizabeth House: 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: The Pines (Good, 0.3 miles away) and Select Lifestyles Limited - 512-514 Stratford Road (Good, 0.5 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    The Pines Good, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
  3. G
    Swallows Meadow Court Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. G
    Connaught House Good, 0.8 miles away
  5. RI
    Tanworth Court Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away

See all care homes in Solihull

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 6 January 2026 (assessment visit 7 October 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: 28 October to 17 November 2025. The service is a residential home providing personal care support to older people some of whom were living with dementia. Elizabeth House accommodates up to 20 people in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection 14 people lived at the service.

  • Safe No rating
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

During the assessment we spoke with people who received care from the service and their relatives; healthcare professionals linked to the service. We spoke with staff including the registered manager, the deputy manager, housekeeper, training manager and care staff.

This was a responsive inspection of two key questions triggered by our ongoing monitoring of the service.

Staff understood risks associated with people’s care, but some care records showed effective monitoring did not always take place as required.

Staff had access to ongoing training to develop their skills however it was not always clear from training records if all required training had been completed and there was no training policy.

The provider’s supervision policy stated there should be 3 supervisions and 1 appraisal per annum. However, Regular supervisions were not always completed.

We found concerns in relation to governance; the provider’s audits were not sufficiently detailed to ensure a robust system of oversight were taking place. Audits had failed to identify the concerns we found at this inspection. We found concerns related to incidents and accidents, and the lack of consistent investigation and analysis when things had gone wrong.


Processes were in place to help keep people safe and protect them from harm.

Equipment checks took place regularly to support people’s needs and ensure they were kept safe.

Staff administered medicines as prescribed to support people’s healthcare needs.

Cleaning of the home took place regularly and systems in place supported infection prevention and control.


At our last inspection, the rating for this service was Good (published 01 March 2019). The rating following this assessment has changed to Requires Improvement.

At this assessment we found 1 breach in relation to good governance; we have requested the provider send us an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

The registered manager was responsive to our findings and started taking immediate action to make improvements at the service.

People and/or their family members were involved in the assessment of people’s needs to ensure these could be met at the service.

Assessments considered people’s individual communication needs as well as personal and healthcare needs. People’s care was regularly reviewed however we found some care records were inaccurate or had missing information.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff. People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy and had a choice of meals.

Special diets were made available to those who required them. People had access to some activities of interest to them, to stay physically and mentally active.

People felt at ease to raise any concerns if they needed to and were confident action would be taken and improvements made.

People knew staff well. Records of people’s needs were shared (as appropriate) with other agencies to support the best outcomes and ensure the safe transition of people when moving services or attending hospital appointments.

People told us staff understood their care and treatment needs, and advised they were asked for their consent before care was provided. People spoke positively of living at the home and of the staff including management staff. People said they were treated with patience and respect.

One person told us, “The staff treat me very well; they are always here to do whatever I want.” People made daily living choices related to their care and support, and were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. Staff worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection 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.

  2. 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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has changed to 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 provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to good governance.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 6 January 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 6 January 2026. 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 manager
Joanne Clarke
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Older People

Inspection report

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

10 inspection reports, latest 18 March 2021. Latest assessment published 6 January 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
09364967 (opens Companies House)
Charity number
222725

Getting help from Solihull Metropolitan Borough 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 Elizabeth House provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Elizabeth House as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Elizabeth House have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 20 beds at Elizabeth House.
When was Elizabeth House last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Elizabeth House was published on 6 January 2026.
Who runs Elizabeth House?
Elizabeth House is run by Shirley Old Peoples Welfare Committee.
What is Elizabeth House's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 6 January 2026.

Contact

Address
77 Elizabeth Grove, Union Road, Shirley, Solihull, B90 3BX Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: The Pines (Good, 0.3 miles away) and Select Lifestyles Limited - 512-514 Stratford Road (Good, 0.5 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    The Pines Good, 0.3 miles away
  2. G
  3. G
    Swallows Meadow Court Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. G
    Connaught House Good, 0.8 miles away
  5. RI
    Tanworth Court Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away

See all care homes in Solihull