Nelson House
- Care home
- 21 beds
- No nursing
- Registered since 2011
- Central Dudley, Dudley, West Midlands
Inadequate
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
5 ratings
Its last inspection moved it down from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
3 months
since the latest rating was published.
2 of 82
rated care homes in Dudley are rated Inadequate, like this one.
Nelson House: inspection record
Rated Inadequate in July 2026, down from Requires improvement.
| 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.
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Richmond Residential Lodge Ltd (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Himley Manor Care Home (Good, 0.4 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Richmond Residential Lodge Ltd Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Himley Manor Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- – Broadway Halls Care Home Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
- G Castleview Residential Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- RI Highview Home Requires improvement, 0.4 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 22 July 2026 (assessment visit 21 April 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 29 April 2026 to 13 May 2025. The site visits took place on 29 April, 5 and 6 May 2026. The assessment was undertaken in response to concerns shared with Care Quality Commission.
- Safe Inadequate
- Effective Inadequate
- Caring No rating
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led Inadequate
Read the rest of CQC's summary
Nelson House is a residential care home providing support to older and younger people and people with mental health needs for up to 21 people. At the time of our assessment there were 15 people living at the home.
Since our last inspection in March 2022, we found the service had not made the required improvements to meet the breaches of regulations and improve the standard of care provided to people. We found the provider was still in breach of 2 regulations in relation to risk management and good governance. We also identified new breaches of regulations in relation to person centred care, consent, safeguarding, nutrition and hydration, safe premises and staffing.
The provider did not have a good learning culture and risks to people were not managed safely. The provider did not ensure people’s individual needs and preferences were met. Systems were not in place to ensure people’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were met. Staff had insufficient guidance for the management of people’s known health conditions and risks to ensure these were managed safely. We identified a lack of effective monitoring and mitigation in relation to risks such as dehydration, food intake, malnutrition, and skin breakdown. People’s medicines were not always managed safely. The provider did not follow their own or the Local Authority safeguarding procedures to ensure people were safeguarded from harm. The provider did not ensure the environment was safe, and risks were not being proactively identified and managed. The environment was not well maintained, and there were delays in work being completed once issues had been reported. Systems to monitor the safety of the environment were ineffective and had not identified the widespread risks and shortfalls we found.
The provider had not ensured enough trained staff were on duty to always meet people’s needs. The provider failed to have effective quality assurance and auditing systems to maintain oversight of the home. Systems to ensure care was provided safely and appropriately were not robust. In addition, the provider had not consistently notified the CQC of all notifiable events as required by regulation. The provider had failed to identify the issues highlighted during this assessment which meant urgent action was taken to maintain people’s safety.
Staff did their best to support people and provide care which met their needs. Staff felt supported by their colleagues, but did not feel valued by the provider.
In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.
This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.
-
Safe
Inadequate
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 changed to inadequate. This meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.
The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, safe environment, staffing and safeguarding.
-
Effective
Inadequate
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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in people’s care, support and outcomes.
The provider was in breach of regulations in relation to gaining people’s consent, and meeting peoples nutritional and hydration needs.
-
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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.
-
Responsive
No rating
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.
The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care.
-
Well-led
Inadequate
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 changed to inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in leadership. Leaders and the culture they created did not assure the delivery of high-quality care.
The provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to adequate governance at the home.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Inadequate on 22 July 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Inadequate on 22 July 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Caring was rated Requires improvement on 22 July 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 22 July 2026. Ask to see how care plans are kept up to date, how complaints are handled and what activities are on offer.
Registration details
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Mental Health, Older People, Younger Adults
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)8 inspection reports, latest 29 April 2022. Latest assessment published 22 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
- 05975682 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0300 555 0055, Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Nelson House provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Nelson House as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Nelson House have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 21 beds at Nelson House.
- When was Nelson House last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Nelson House was published on 22 July 2026.
- Who runs Nelson House?
- Nelson House is run by Quality Care Home (Midlands) Limited.
- What is Nelson House's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Inadequate, published on 22 July 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01384 237717
- Address
- 1-3 Nelson Road, Dudley, DY1 2AG Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Richmond Residential Lodge Ltd (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Himley Manor Care Home (Good, 0.4 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Richmond Residential Lodge Ltd Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Himley Manor Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- – Broadway Halls Care Home Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
- G Castleview Residential Care Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- RI Highview Home Requires improvement, 0.4 miles away