Miles House - 4 Hentland Close
- Care home
- 5 beds
- No nursing
- Registered since 2011
- Worcestershire, 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.
7 months
since the latest rating was published.
24 of 156
rated care homes in Worcestershire are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Miles House - 4 Hentland Close: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in March 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: Haywood Lodge (Good, 1 mile away) and Southcrest Nursing Home (Good, 2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Haywood Lodge Good, 1 mile away
- G Southcrest Nursing Home Good, 2 miles away
- G Bowood Court & Mews Good, 2.1 miles away
- G Millcroft Good, 2.1 miles away
- G Four Acres Good, 2.3 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 31 March 2026 (assessment visit 1 December 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
At the time of our assessment, there were 4 people living at the service. We visited on 9 and 15 December 2025 and 12 January 2026 following concerns raised about the service. During this assessment, we reviewed all quality statements under each of the five key questions.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring No rating
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
We assessed the service against Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture to determine whether people with a learning disability and autistic people were supported in ways that promoted dignity, equality, choice, independence and access to their community.
Right Support
The manager demonstrated an understanding of these principles and applied some elements in practice, for example by promoting aspects of choice and control and encouraging person‑centred approaches aligned with human rights‑based care.
Right care
The provider did not consistently provide care which upheld people’s dignity, privacy and individual needs. While some staff demonstrated warmth and understanding this was not embedded across the team which meant care and support was inconsistent.
Right culture
Governance and oversight were not effective in identifying and driving improvements or ensuring a consistent, rights based culture. The culture of the service did not consistently promote people’s rights, dignity or inclusion. Leaders did not always model or embed the organisation’s values. Care and support were inconsistent.
These principles were not consistently embedded, and we observed practices which did not uphold or support them.
The provider used an electronic care system; we found some sections were incomplete or lacked sufficient detail. Where people lacked capacity to make specific decisions, the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) was not always applied in line with legal requirements. Care planning and risk assessments were inconsistent in quality, and key information was not always identified, recorded or mitigated. Staff had not received all the training required for their roles, including learning disability and autism training at the appropriate level, which meant they did not always have the skills or knowledge required to provide safe or effective support.
Medicines were not always managed safely. Governance systems were not robust enough to ensure adequate oversight of practice or the environment, and leaders had not identified or addressed the shortfalls we found.
At this assessment, we found 5 breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, person‑centred care, dignity and respect, and good governance.
-
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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.This meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.
The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, medicines management and safety of the environment.
-
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 required 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 consent to care and treatment.
-
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.
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 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 service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to promoting dignity and good governance.
Questions to ask when you visit
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 31 March 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 31 March 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Caring was rated Requires improvement on 31 March 2026. Ask how staff protect dignity and how residents are involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 31 March 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
- Shambuyi Kayemba
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Care home service without nursing
- Who it supports
- Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Physical Disability
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)5 inspection reports, latest 16 August 2019. Latest assessment published 31 March 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
- MADeBA Care Ltd
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 07433156 (opens Companies House)
MADeBA Care Ltd runs 2 services, all in the West Midlands. 1 is rated Good or Outstanding and 1 is rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.
Other services run by MADeBA Care Ltd
- G Excalibur Serviced Offices Good. Home care, Worcestershire
Getting help from Worcestershire 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 Worcestershire County Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 01905 768053, Monday to Thursday 9am to 5pm, Friday 9am to 4.30pm
- Contact adult social care online
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Worcestershire County Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Miles House - 4 Hentland Close provide nursing care?
- No. The Care Quality Commission lists Miles House - 4 Hentland Close as a care home without nursing.
- How many beds does Miles House - 4 Hentland Close have?
- The Care Quality Commission's register lists 5 beds at Miles House - 4 Hentland Close.
- When was Miles House - 4 Hentland Close last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Miles House - 4 Hentland Close was published on 31 March 2026.
- Who runs Miles House - 4 Hentland Close?
- Miles House - 4 Hentland Close is run by MADeBA Care Ltd. It runs 2 services, all in the West Midlands.
- What is Miles House - 4 Hentland Close's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 31 March 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 01527 455705
- Address
- Winyates West, Redditch, B98 0LP Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Haywood Lodge (Good, 1 mile away) and Southcrest Nursing Home (Good, 2 miles away).
Nearest care homes:
- G Haywood Lodge Good, 1 mile away
- G Southcrest Nursing Home Good, 2 miles away
- G Bowood Court & Mews Good, 2.1 miles away
- G Millcroft Good, 2.1 miles away
- G Four Acres Good, 2.3 miles away