Rated Care Homes

Homelands Nursing Home

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 6 ratings

    Its last inspection improved it from Inadequate to Requires improvement.

  • 15 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 47 of 309

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

Homelands Nursing Home: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 50 beds, West Sussex

Rated Requires improvement in July 2025, up from Inadequate.

Homelands Nursing Home: 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: Eastridge Manor EMI Nursing and Residential Home (Good, 2 miles away) and Belle Vue Country House (Good, 2.5 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
  2. G
    Belle Vue Country House Good, 2.5 miles away
  3. G
    Aniska Lodge Good, 3.5 miles away
  4. G
    Glen Arun Care Home Good, 4.4 miles away
  5. RI
    Oakhill House Care Home Requires improvement, 4.6 miles away

See all care homes in West Sussex

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 28 July 2025 (assessment visit 27 May 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Dates of assessment 30 June to 14 July 2025. Homelands Nursing Home is a care home, providing accommodation, nursing and personal care to people. The Manor House supports people with nursing needs and the Coach House supports people with nursing needs and advancing dementia. At the time of our inspection, 31 people were being supported at the service.

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

Homelands Nursing Home had made considerable progress since our last inspection in January 2025. People now received their medicines safely and as prescribed, and there was a policy in place to support safe and effective use of medicines. People were now protected from the risk of harm or abuse; staff were aware of how to reduce restrictive practices and escalated any concerns regarding unexplained bruises or injuries. Managers now appropriately referred incidents to the local authority safeguarding team.

Risks to people’s health were now being assessed and managed. However, we identified instances where risk assessments and care records were inconsistent or not updated with professional’s advice. Daily notes did not always echo the guidance in care plans, although staff did know people well and supported them in accordance with their assessed needs.

Works had been completed and some were ongoing to improve the environment, specifically the Coach House, risk assessments had been conducted to consider the impact this had on people. Environmental risks were not always assessed, for example, the stairwell gate had been removed without assessments undertaken to consider people’s safety regarding this decision.

Staff now received relevant training and supervisions were held to assess their knowledge. Staff told us they welcomed the additional training and their practice was also observed to explore additional training needs.

We observed enough staff to support people, staff delivered care with kindness and respect. People and relatives spoke positively about staff interactions. The provider had taken steps to promote people’s independence and choice, for example, by introducing pictorial menus and personalised activities.

People did receive person-centred care, however, documents did not always reflect people’s specific wishes. People and their relatives were being consulted on their support, care plans were being reviewed to include wishes, needs and preferences.

Staff now engaged more proactively with professionals and mostly followed their advice. Steps were being taken to strengthen integration between the Coach House and the Manor House to promote greater consistency across both settings.

The service was in a transitional period with a new management structure in place, they were supported by an external consultant. While visible leadership and staff engagement had improved, governance systems were not yet embedded. Internal audits were planned but had not commenced at the time of inspection, this limited the provider’s ability to proactively identify and address where systems required review and where further improvements were needed.

Although vast improvements had been made, we identified 2 continued breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance.

  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 continued breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment.

  2. Effective

    Good

    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 changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  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 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 continued breach of legal regulation in relation to processes of governance.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 28 July 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 28 July 2025. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.

Registration details

Registered manager
Tracey Stewart
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People, Younger Adults

Inspection report

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

8 inspection reports, latest 26 August 2022. Latest assessment published 28 July 2025; 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
03077781 (opens Companies House)

Medicrest Limited runs 4 services in England, 1 of them in the South East. 2 are rated Good or Outstanding, 1 is rated Requires improvement or Inadequate and 1 has no rating yet.

Other services run by Medicrest Limited

  1. G
    Acorn House - Croydon Good. Care home, Croydon, London
  2. G
    Acorn Lodge - Croydon Good. Care home, Croydon, London
  3. –
    Morven House Not yet rated. Care home, Croydon, London

Getting help from West Sussex 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 Homelands Nursing Home provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Homelands Nursing Home as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Homelands Nursing Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 50 beds at Homelands Nursing Home.
When was Homelands Nursing Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Homelands Nursing Home was published on 28 July 2025.
Who runs Homelands Nursing Home?
Homelands Nursing Home is run by Medicrest Limited. It runs 4 services in England, 1 of them in the South East.
What is Homelands Nursing Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 28 July 2025.

Contact

Phone
01403 864581
Address
Horsham Road, Cowfold, RH13 8AJ Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Eastridge Manor EMI Nursing and Residential Home (Good, 2 miles away) and Belle Vue Country House (Good, 2.5 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
  2. G
    Belle Vue Country House Good, 2.5 miles away
  3. G
    Aniska Lodge Good, 3.5 miles away
  4. G
    Glen Arun Care Home Good, 4.4 miles away
  5. RI
    Oakhill House Care Home Requires improvement, 4.6 miles away

See all care homes in West Sussex