Rated Care Homes

Moorlands Nursing Home

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 7 ratings

    Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 56 of 302

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

Moorlands Nursing Home: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 41 beds, Surrey

Rated Requires improvement in July 2026, down from Good.

Moorlands 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: Hallmark Lakeview Luxury Care Home (Good, 0.9 miles away) and Collingwood Grange Care Home (Good, 1.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Hallmark Lakeview Luxury Care Home Good, 0.9 miles away
  2. G
    Collingwood Grange Care Home Good, 1.3 miles away
  3. G
    Dimensions 1 Ridgewood Drive Good, 1.5 miles away
  4. G
    Cherrydale Good, 1.5 miles away
  5. G
    Camberley Cottage Good, 1.5 miles away

See all care homes in Surrey

See all care homes in Bagshot

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 27 July 2026 (assessment visit 7 May 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: 26 May 2026.

The service is a nursing care home providing support to up to 37 older people living with frailty and dementia. At the time of our assessment, 32 people were in receipt of a regulated activity.

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

The service is not a specialist service for autistic people or people with a learning disability. However, some people supported by the service had a learning disability. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the provider was not meeting this guidance. The provider did not support people to access and integrate into their local community, or provide meaningful activities and engagement within the service in circumstances where community access was not possible.

The provider of the service had changed in December 2025. Our assessment was in response to concerns raised by relatives and visiting professionals about the quality and safety of care being delivered since the new provider took over the service.

There was a negative culture within the service, with some staff feeling reluctant to speak up for fear of losing their jobs. There were also ongoing allegations of senior management discriminating against certain staff members. These allegations were currently being investigated by the provider’s HR team and trade unions who were supporting staff who were no longer working at the service.

There was a lack of oversight and governance within the service, and audits that were carried out by the management team were ineffective in their use. The provider had also not made CQC aware of notifiable incidents such as unexplained bruising and unwitnessed falls that resulted in injury to the person. Feedback from people and relatives was not acted upon to improve the service.

Various health and social care professionals informed us of difficulties they had encountered when trying to communicate with the provider and fed back they felt the service had deteriorated since December 2025. Incidents had occurred where people’s decline in health had not been alerted to emergency services in a timely manner resulting in delayed treatment.

Staff did not always understand their responsibility to safeguard people from abuse. Risk assessments and care plans contained contradicting information, and staff did not know people and their interests, preferences and backgrounds well. There was a lack of engagement and activity provision available in the service, especially for those who were nursed in bed. We identified areas of the environment were not safe and needed refurbishment and did not maximise the experience for people living with dementia.

Whilst there was enough staff to meet people’s basic needs, there was no available time for staff to provide personalised care or engage fully with people in a meaningful way. Staff had not always completed training that was appropriate for their role, and any concerns raised by staff in supervisions and appraisals were not addressed by the provider. Areas of medicine management needed improving to meet national guidance and best practice.

People with specific nutritional needs were catered for. People’s needs were assessed prior to them moving into the service and at regular intervals to determine if their needs had changed. People, relatives and healthcare professionals were complimentary of the registered manager. However, at the time of our assessment they were working their notice period after resigning from the service.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 providing safe care and treatment to people.

  2. 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.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement.

    This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

  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.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement.

    This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

  4. Responsive

    No rating

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement.

    This meant people’s needs were not always met.

    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to providing personalised care to people.

  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.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 legal regulation in relation to governance and oversight of the service and not fulfilling their regulatory responsibility of informing CQC of notifiable incidents.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 27 July 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Requires improvement on 27 July 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Caring was rated Requires improvement on 27 July 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
  4. Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 27 July 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
Remia Aguas
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, 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
04937785 (opens Companies House)

S.E.S Care Homes Ltd runs 4 services, all in the South East. 3 are rated Good or Outstanding and 1 is rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.

Other services run by S.E.S Care Homes Ltd

  1. G
    Anchorstone Nursing Home Good. Care home with nursing, Surrey
  2. G
    Crossways Nursing Home Good. Care home with nursing, Hampshire
  3. G
    Valeries Care Home and Valeries Home Care Good. Care home, Wokingham

Getting help from Surrey 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 Moorlands Nursing Home provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Moorlands Nursing Home as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Moorlands Nursing Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 41 beds at Moorlands Nursing Home.
When was Moorlands Nursing Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Moorlands Nursing Home was published on 27 July 2026.
Who runs Moorlands Nursing Home?
Moorlands Nursing Home is run by S.E.S Care Homes Ltd. It runs 4 services, all in the South East.
What is Moorlands Nursing Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 27 July 2026.

Contact

Phone
01276 537713
Address
Macdonald Road, Lightwater, GU18 5US Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Hallmark Lakeview Luxury Care Home (Good, 0.9 miles away) and Collingwood Grange Care Home (Good, 1.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Hallmark Lakeview Luxury Care Home Good, 0.9 miles away
  2. G
    Collingwood Grange Care Home Good, 1.3 miles away
  3. G
    Dimensions 1 Ridgewood Drive Good, 1.5 miles away
  4. G
    Cherrydale Good, 1.5 miles away
  5. G
    Camberley Cottage Good, 1.5 miles away

See all care homes in Surrey

See all care homes in Bagshot