Wainford House Residential Care Home
- Care home
- 28 beds
- No nursing
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2024
- Beccles, Suffolk, East of England
Inadequate
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
9 ratings
Its last inspection moved it down from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
This month
The latest rating was published.
3 of 156
rated care homes in Suffolk are rated Inadequate, like this one.
Wainford House Residential Care Home: inspection record
Rated Inadequate in February 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: The White House (Good, 0.5 miles away) and Dell House (Good, 0.6 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- – Broads View Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
- G The White House Good, 0.5 miles away
- G Dell House Good, 0.6 miles away
- G Beccles Care Home Good, 0.6 miles away
- – Tower Hill (Residential) Not yet rated, 1 mile away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 4 November 2026 (assessment visit 19 August 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of inspection: 7 October 2026 to 27 October 2026. The service is a care home providing care to up to 28 people. There were 13 people living at the home at the time of this inspection. This inspection was completed to identify if improvements had been made following a previous inspection in September and October 2025.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring Good
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
At our previous inspections in 2025, Wainford House was rated Inadequate and placed in ‘special measures’. At this inspection we found improvements had been made to the day-to-day care people received and the service has been rated Requires Improvement. This means the service is no longer in ‘special measures’. However, further improvement was needed to ensure people consistently received safe care in a well-maintained environment and that governance systems provided effective oversight. The provider remained in breach of Regulations 12 (safe care and treatment), 15 (premises and equipment) and 17 (good governance).
The provider had systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service; however, these were not always effective. Audits and checks had not identified several of the concerns we found, and actions were not always clearly tracked to completion or reviewed to ensure improvements had been sustained. While the provider responded to concerns raised during the assessment, further work was needed to ensure risks and shortfalls were identified proactively, and improvements were embedded and sustained.
However, further improvements were needed. Risks to people were not always effectively assessed or managed, and we identified environmental hazards which had not been recognised through the provider’s own audit and governance systems. Care records were not always accurate or consistent, medicines were not always managed safely, and infection prevention and control practices required improvement. The environment was not consistently safe, comfortable or well maintained.
People did not always have sufficient opportunities to take part in meaningful activities based on their interests, abilities and preferences. Information was not always demonstrated to be accessible to people, and people’s wishes for future and end-of-life care were not consistently recorded. Although staffing levels were sufficient during our visits, recruitment and supervision records did not always demonstrate effective oversight due to gaps in records, including names of the agency staff working.
The provider had made some improvements to staffing arrangements, communication, management support and oversight of people’s care. Staff described improved morale and a more positive culture. People and relatives were generally positive about the service. We observed staff supporting people in a calm and unhurried way, respecting their choices and promoting their independence. Staff were responsive to changes in people’s needs and worked well with healthcare professionals to support people’s health and wellbeing.
-
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 Inadequate. At this inspection the rating has changed to Requires Improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe. There was an increased risk of harm and limited assurance about safety.
The findings identified repeated breaches of Regulation 12 (safe care and treatment) and Regulation 15 (premises and equipment) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider did not consistently assess and reduce risks to people’s safety, manage medicines safely or control infection risks. Premises and equipment were not consistently clean, suitable for their intended purpose or properly maintained.
-
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 inspection we rated this key question Inadequate. At this inspection 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
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 inspection we rated this key question Inadequate. At this inspection the rating has changed to Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
No rating
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
At our last inspection we rated this key question Inadequate. At this inspection the rating 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 inspection we rated this key question Inadequate. 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 findings identified a repeated breach of Regulation 17 (good governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Ineffective checks and incomplete follow-up meant risks could remain unidentified or unresolved, leaving people at risk of avoidable harm and inconsistent care.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Inadequate on 13 February 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Inadequate on 13 February 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Caring was rated Inadequate on 13 February 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive was rated Inadequate on 13 February 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
- Dementia, Older People, Younger Adults
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)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
- FC041183 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Suffolk 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 Suffolk County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0800 917 1109, Monday to Friday, 8am to 5pm (excluding bank holidays)
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Suffolk County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Wainford House Residential Care Home provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Wainford House Residential Care Home as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Wainford House Residential Care Home have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 28 beds at Wainford House Residential Care Home.
- When was Wainford House Residential Care Home last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Wainford House Residential Care Home was published on 4 November 2026.
- Who runs Wainford House Residential Care Home?
- Wainford House Residential Care Home is run by Wainford House Residential Care Home Limited.
- What is Wainford House Residential Care Home's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Inadequate, published on 13 February 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01502 714975
- Address
- 1-3 Saltgate Road, Beccles, NR34 9AN Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: The White House (Good, 0.5 miles away) and Dell House (Good, 0.6 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- – Broads View Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
- G The White House Good, 0.5 miles away
- G Dell House Good, 0.6 miles away
- G Beccles Care Home Good, 0.6 miles away
- – Tower Hill (Residential) Not yet rated, 1 mile away