43 Station Road
- Care home
- 6 beds
- No nursing
- Registered since 2010
- Old Windsor, Windsor and Maidenhead, South East
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
4 ratings
First rated Good in 2016, most recently Requires improvement in May 2026.
5 months
since the latest rating was published.
9 of 31
rated care homes in Windsor and Maidenhead are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
43 Station Road: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in May 2026.
| 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: Fearnley House (Good, 1.2 miles away) and Heronsmede (Outstanding, 1.2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI The Manor Care Home Requires improvement, 1 mile away
- G Fearnley House Good, 1.2 miles away
- O Heronsmede Outstanding, 1.2 miles away
- G White House Good, 1.2 miles away
- G Rivermede Court Good, 1.7 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 8 May 2026 (assessment visit 11 February 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
We carried out this assessment from 11 March to 12 March 2026. 43 Station Road is a care home without nursing providing support for up to 6 adults with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of our assessment, 4 people were using the service.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring Good
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
At the last inspection, the service was rated requires improvement and was in breach regulations relating tosafe care and treatment and good governance. During this assessment, we found continued breaches of these legal regulations and new breaches relating to person centred care. We discussed the concerns identified with the management team during the assessment to begin addressing these issues.
We assessed the service against the Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture guidance. The provider was not consistently working in line with this guidance. Staff were not aware of the guidance, and people’s needs, preferences, aspirations and outcomes were not routinely reviewed in accordance with its principles. This limited people’s opportunity to live an ordinary life and be supported in ways that reflected their individual choices and goals.
People were not consistently supported to manage identified risks, including risks associated with food and drink. Although support plans contained detailed information, guidance was not always followed, placing people at risk.
Oversight systems were not effective. Managers did not ensure audit processes were robust enough to identify and respond to concerns, including those relating to medicine storage temperatures. However, managers took prompt action to address these issues when they were raised during the assessment.
Support plans contained guidance on non‑verbal communication and confirming people’s choices. However, staff did not consistently use these methods, and some records did not reflect respectful language.
The service was supported by a new leadership team who had taken action to stabilise the service and address issues that had not been effectively managed previously. While leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of person‑centred care and spoke positively about plans to improve the service, improvements were not yet embedded, and governance arrangements had not assured sustained compliance.
Leaders and managers were approachable and promoted an inclusive culture aligned with the provider’s values.
-
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 service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance.
-
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.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care and good governance.
-
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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.
This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care.
-
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 service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to person centred care.
-
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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 8 May 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 8 May 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 8 May 2026. Ask to see how care plans are kept up to date, how complaints are handled and what activities are on offer.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 8 May 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
- Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Younger Adults
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)7 inspection reports, latest 19 July 2019. Latest assessment published 8 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
- Voyage 1 LimitedBrand: Voyage
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 02215899 (opens Companies House)
Voyage 1 Limited runs 278 services in England, 76 of them in the South East. 239 are rated Good or Outstanding, 24 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate and 15 have no rating yet.
Other services run by Voyage 1 Limited
- O 1 Sheringham Avenue Outstanding. Care home, Enfield, London
- O 23 Cecil Road Outstanding. Care home, Derbyshire, East Midlands
- O 4 Pages Orchard Outstanding. Care home, Oxfordshire
- O Bewick House Outstanding. Care home, Darlington, North East
Getting help from Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 01628 683744
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does 43 Station Road provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists 43 Station Road as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does 43 Station Road have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 6 beds at 43 Station Road.
- When was 43 Station Road last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for 43 Station Road was published on 8 May 2026.
- Who runs 43 Station Road?
- 43 Station Road is run by Voyage 1 Limited. It runs 278 services in England, 76 of them in the South East.
- What is 43 Station Road's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 8 May 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01784 488581
- Address
- Wraysbury, Staines, TW19 5ND Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Fearnley House (Good, 1.2 miles away) and Heronsmede (Outstanding, 1.2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- RI The Manor Care Home Requires improvement, 1 mile away
- G Fearnley House Good, 1.2 miles away
- O Heronsmede Outstanding, 1.2 miles away
- G White House Good, 1.2 miles away
- G Rivermede Court Good, 1.7 miles away