Rated Care Homes

Wellesley Court

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 2 ratings

    Rated Good at every inspection since 2018.

  • This month

    The latest rating was published.

  • 166 of 205

    rated home care services in Hampshire are rated Good, like this one.

Wellesley Court: inspection record

Home care, Hampshire

Rated Good in October 2026.

Wellesley Court: 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

  1. –
  2. –
    Simplified Staffing Hampshire Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
  3. –
    Ribuah Healthcare Ltd Not yet rated, 1.1 miles away
  4. G
    Enchanting Care Good, 1.1 miles away
  5. G
    Mushavi Private Limited Good, 1.1 miles away

See all home care services in Hampshire

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 12 October 2026 (assessment visit 21 July 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Our view of the service

About the service

Wellesley Court provides support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, 9 people were receiving a regulated activity.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Who the service is for

Wellesley Court is a domiciliary care service that supports people to live independently within their own homes. The service provides personal care and support to people living in the local community, enabling them to maintain their independence and remain in familiar surroundings.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates the personal care provided by the service. This inspection therefore focused on the provision of personal care and the experiences of people receiving that support.

CQC only inspects services provided to people who receive 'personal care', such as assistance with personal hygiene and eating. Where relevant, we also consider the wider social care people receive.

The service provides personal care and support to people who require assistance with daily living activities. At the time of our inspection, nine people were receiving support. Their needs varied and included support for physical frailty, long-term health conditions, and age-related memory loss.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment between the 21 July and the 19 August 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people's individual needs and received appropriate training, supervision and support to deliver safe, effective and person-centred care. Training included safeguarding, medication management, moving and handling, infection control and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Staff were able to explain how they tailored their support to meet people's preferences, promote independence and respond to changing needs.

People's care plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly and updated when circumstances changed. This ensured individuals received the right level of support while maintaining choice and control over their daily lives. Staff worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals, relatives and other agencies to help people achieve positive outcomes and remain engaged within their local communities.

Senior staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their regulatory responsibilities and promoted a positive, open and community-focused culture. People were encouraged to maintain relationships, access local services and participate in activities that supported their wellbeing and independence. Staff reported feeling supported by management and understood the service's values and expectations.

The provider had effective safeguarding arrangements in place and understood its responsibility to protect people from abuse, neglect and avoidable harm. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding procedures and knew how to recognise, report and escalate concerns. Safeguarding was regularly reinforced through training, supervision and team meetings.

Effective quality assurance and governance systems were established to monitor the safety and quality of the service. Regular audits of care records, medication administration, risk assessments and staff practice were undertaken. Feedback from people receiving support, relatives and staff was actively sought and used to drive continuous improvement. Where areas for development were identified, action plans were implemented and monitored by management.

Appropriate risk management and emergency planning arrangements were in place to support continuity of care and ensure people received timely assistance when required. Contingency plans, emergency contacts and individual risk assessments were regularly reviewed to ensure staff could respond effectively to unforeseen circumstances.

The provider acted in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff demonstrated an understanding of consent, decision-making and best-interest processes and supported people to make their own decisions wherever possible. Where individuals lacked capacity to make specific decisions, appropriate assessments and best-interest discussions were completed and recorded.

  1. Safe

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. 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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained a good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
  2. Ask how visit times are agreed and who covers when your usual carer is away.

Registration details

Registered manager
Ivana Wilson
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

1 inspection report, latest 16 February 2018. Latest assessment published 12 October 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
Methodist HomesBrand: Methodist Homes
Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
04043124 (opens Companies House)
Charity number
1083995

Methodist Homes runs 93 services in England, 10 of them in the South East. 83 are rated Good or Outstanding and 10 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate.

Other services run by Methodist Homes

  1. O
    Briar Hill House Outstanding. Care home with nursing, Staffordshire, West Midlands
  2. O
    Horfield Lodge Outstanding. Care home with nursing, Bristol, South West
  3. O
    Mapplewell Manor Outstanding. Care home, Barnsley, Yorkshire and the Humber
  4. O
    Queens Court Outstanding. Care home, Cambridgeshire, East of England

See all 93 services run by Methodist Homes

Getting help from Hampshire 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 Wellesley Court provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Wellesley Court.
When was Wellesley Court last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Wellesley Court was published on 12 October 2026.
Who runs Wellesley Court?
Wellesley Court is run by Methodist Homes. It runs 93 services in England, 10 of them in the South East.
What is Wellesley Court's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 12 October 2026.