Rated Care Homes

Lillibet House

I

Inadequate

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 7 ratings

    First rated Good in 2015, most recently Inadequate in May 2026.

  • 5 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • The only one

    rated Inadequate care home in Bedford, out of 69 with a rating.

Lillibet House: inspection record

Care home, 30 beds, Bedford

Rated Inadequate in May 2026.

Lillibet House: 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: Elcombe House (Outstanding, less than 0.1 miles away) and 22 De Parys Avenue (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Elcombe House Outstanding, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    22 De Parys Avenue Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Autism Care UK (Bedford) Good, 0.3 miles away
  4. G
    Bunyan Lodge Good, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Park House Good, 0.3 miles away

See all care homes in Bedford

See all care homes in Central Bedford

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 19 May 2026 (assessment visit 6 February 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 10 March 2026 to 31 March 2026.

Lillibet House is a care home supporting people who may be living with dementia, mental health support needs, or a physical disability. The service provides accommodation for people who need personal care and nursing care. The service can support up to 30 people, and 23 people were living at the service at the time of our inspection.

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

At our last inspection, the service was in breach of legal regulations of the Health and Social Care Act (2014) in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding people from abuse, person centred care, safe staffing, dignity and respect, the reporting of notifiable incidents to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and good governance. At this inspection the service is still in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding people from abuse, person centred care, safe staffing and good governance. The service is no longer in breach of the legal regulations in relation to dignity and respect and the reporting of notifiable incidents to the CQC. The service has remained inadequate at this inspection. Please see the full report for details.

Systems continued to not be fully embedded to identify potential safeguarding concerns and take action to safeguard people. People’s risk assessments and care plans continued to not always be up to date with their current support needs or contained generic information about support needs, rather than being specific to people’s needs. People’s daily records continued to not be monitored to make sure support was being given to them in line with their identified needs.

Not all staff had the training they needed to keep people safe. Staff competency checks to help ensure they could support people safely were not effective and actions to support staff to be more effective were not completed. The service continued to not be safe in relation to fire safety. People continued to not be supported safely with their medicines. People continued to not be supported in line with best practice and staff had mixed levels of knowledge to support people with specific support needs. It was not always clear how staff were supporting people to live healthy lives.

People continued to not always be treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect and it continued to not be clear how people’s individual preferences were being considered when they were supported. People were not always receiving person centred care, often going long periods of time without meaningful engagement. It continued to be unclear how people and relatives were asked for feedback about the service. Staff did not feel well supported in their job roles and were treated poorly in circumstances such as when they spoke up or when they made an error. Governance systems continued to not be effective in identifying and driving improvements. The service had not had stable management since our last inspection and audits had not been effective in driving necessary improvements. The service had not improved in a lot of areas since our last inspection.

The service continued to be clean, and staff followed good Infection Prevention Control (IPC) measures. Staff continued to contact health professionals and worked well with them when necessary. Mental capacity assessments in place for people were detailed. Staff were kind and caring and wanted what was best for people. People and relatives were mostly positive about their support. Despite our findings the majority of staff tried their best to treat people kindly and give them good experiences. The provider had sought support to start making further improvements such as hiring a consultancy company to start putting audits and measures in place to effectively monitor the quality of the service. There had been some improvements in some areas since our last inspection.

In instances where CQC has decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

This service remains in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that 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.

  1. Safe

    Inadequate

    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 remains inadequate. This meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.

    The service remains in breach of legal regulations related to safeguarding, safe care and treatment and staffing. Safeguarding concerns were not always reported. Incidents were not always well documented or managed. Care plans did not always contain enough information on managing risks. Medicines were not always managed safely. Some staff did not have all the training they needed to support people safely. Staff competence to support people was not being checked effectively to make sure they could support people safely.

  2. 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 inspection we rated this key question inadequate. At this inspection the rating has remained inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in people’s care, support and outcomes.

  3. 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 inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant people were not always treated with compassion, dignity and respect.

  4. 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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has remained inadequate. This meant services were not planned or delivered in ways that met people’s needs.

    The service was in breach of a legal regulation in relation to person centred care. People’s care plans did not contain the correct information about their support needs. People’s preferences, likes and dislikes were not always recorded or being considered. People were not being asked to feedback about their care and support in meaningful ways. Some people were not supported to engage in meaningful past times.

  5. 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 inspection we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 service was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to good governance. The provider had not always ensured their systems were effective or ensured oversight of quality, safety and management of risks. There had been a lack of improvement at the service since our last inspection.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Inadequate on 19 May 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Inadequate on 19 May 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Caring was rated Requires improvement on 19 May 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
  4. Well-led was rated Inadequate on 19 May 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.

Registration details

Registered manager
Alison Hoey
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, 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
14718791 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Bedford Borough 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 Lillibet House provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Lillibet House as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Lillibet House have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 30 beds at Lillibet House.
When was Lillibet House last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Lillibet House was published on 19 May 2026.
Who runs Lillibet House?
Lillibet House is run by Lillibet House Ltd.
What is Lillibet House's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Inadequate, published on 19 May 2026.

Contact

Phone
01727 810806
Address
Lillibet House, 65 De Parys Avenue, Bedford, MK40 2TR Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Elcombe House (Outstanding, less than 0.1 miles away) and 22 De Parys Avenue (Good, 0.1 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. O
    Elcombe House Outstanding, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    22 De Parys Avenue Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Autism Care UK (Bedford) Good, 0.3 miles away
  4. G
    Bunyan Lodge Good, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Park House Good, 0.3 miles away

See all care homes in Bedford

See all care homes in Central Bedford