Eversleigh Nursing Home
- Care home
- 38 beds
- Nursing care
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2010
- Royal Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, West Midlands
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.
5 months
since the latest rating was published.
30 of 153
rated care homes in Warwickshire are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Eversleigh Nursing Home: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in May 2026, down from Good.
| 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: Gainsborough Hall Care Home (Good, 0.1 miles away) and Royal Leamington Spa Nursing Home (Good, 0.4 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Gainsborough Hall Care Home Good, 0.1 miles away
- RI Arden House Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
- RI Beddoe Court Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
- G Royal Leamington Spa Nursing Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- RI Sebright House Care Home Requires improvement, 0.6 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 6 May 2026 (assessment visit 25 July 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of assessment: 20 August to 22 August 2025. Eversleigh Nursing Home is a nursing home providing care and accommodation to older people. Some of the people at the home are living with other diagnosis or impairments. At the time of our inspection there were 34 people living at the home. Care and support is provided across 3 floors in an adapted, listed building.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring No rating
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
This assessment was completed because we had not inspected this service since 2019. This inspection covered all 5 key questions of safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.
The provider did not always demonstrate effective governance systems to promptly manage the safety of the environment and other risks to people. Improvements were also required to the way people’s medicines were managed. This placed people at risk of harm. We found the provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating to safety, premises and equipment and governance.
Processes to make sure people received their medicines safely were not working well. We found some medicines stocks held did not agree with people’s medicines administration records. We could not therefore be assured people had received the correct amounts of medicines they needed to remain well. The registered manager told us they were not involved in medicines management or checks. Senior staff said they were not aware of the issues we found but agreed to rectify them with staff.
During this assessment we spoke with people who lived at the service, care and nursing staff, a maintenance person, the registered manager and a provider representative. We reviewed care plans, recruitment files, health and safety records, medicines administration records and quality assurance records. There had been changes in the day to day management team but the registered manager had been at this service since November 2022.
The provider’s quality assurance systems were not effective in identifying and rectifying shortfalls in day-to-day practice. Where checks were delegated to others, there was limited oversight to ensure those checks were completed or that they were accurate. A lack of effective checks on the environment and prompt completion of actions identified exposed people to unnecessary risks. This included in relation to fire doors which in some cases closed too fast and could cause the risk of entrapment. We found other fire doors did not close properly. Although some regular environment checks were completed, evidence from our own observations showed there remained a lack of consideration to balance and manage risks, with some risks having a negative impact on infection prevention and control.
Senior staff administered people their medicines, but we found some medicines were not administered in line with manufacturers guidelines. This included medicines applied via a transdermal patches, (medicines applied to the skin via a patch). Senior staff found the electronic medicines management system difficult to operate and the medicines management system did not enable staff to easily find the information we required. We found medicine stock discrepancies had sometimes been amended without any proper investigation to understand why stocks did not balance. Senior staff told us they had checks on their competency to ensure they administered medicines safely and medicines audits were completed monthly. However, the issues we found had not been identified by the registered manager. We could not be confident some people received their medicines safely.
We found concerns with infection prevention and control, which were linked to the environment and there were delays in people’s requests for assistance being responded to. People’s care plans did not always provide staff with the level of detail they required to promote person-centred care. Improvements were required in staff practice when interacting with people, to ensure people’s dignity was promoted. People’s mental capacity assessments did not always evidence people had been given the best opportunity to make their own decisions.
Governance systems had not always identified concerns we found at this inspection, including in relation to the safety and quality of people’s care and staff practice when interacting with people.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
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.
-
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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating tosafe care and treatment and premises and equipment.
-
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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
-
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.
-
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 good. 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 provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating to good governance.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 6 May 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 6 May 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Caring was rated Requires improvement on 6 May 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 6 May 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 manager
- Paul O'Grady
- 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)6 inspection reports, latest 19 June 2019. Latest assessment published 6 May 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
- Provider
- Central England Healthcare LimitedBrand: Central England Healthcare
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 06253884 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Warwickshire County Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Warwickshire County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 01926 359190, Monday to Thursday 9am to 5pm, Friday 9am to 4.30pm
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Warwickshire County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Eversleigh Nursing Home provide nursing care?
- Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Eversleigh Nursing Home as a care home with nursing.
- How many beds does Eversleigh Nursing Home have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 38 beds at Eversleigh Nursing Home.
- When was Eversleigh Nursing Home last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Eversleigh Nursing Home was published on 6 May 2026.
- Who runs Eversleigh Nursing Home?
- Eversleigh Nursing Home is run by Central England Healthcare Limited.
- What is Eversleigh Nursing Home's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 6 May 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01926 424431
- Address
- 2-4 Clarendon Place, Leamington Spa, CV32 5QN Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Gainsborough Hall Care Home (Good, 0.1 miles away) and Royal Leamington Spa Nursing Home (Good, 0.4 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Gainsborough Hall Care Home Good, 0.1 miles away
- RI Arden House Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
- RI Beddoe Court Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
- G Royal Leamington Spa Nursing Home Good, 0.4 miles away
- RI Sebright House Care Home Requires improvement, 0.6 miles away