- Care home
Queen Elizabeth Care Centre
Assessment report published 27 July 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Queen Elizabeth Care Centre is a care home providing accommodation and nursing care for up to 74 older people, some of whom live with dementia, physical health conditions and mental health conditions. This assessment took place on 18 June 2026 and at the time of the assessment, 70 people were living at the service.
This assessment took place in response to concerns raised regarding moving and positioning practices, as well as anonymous feedback relating to staff wellbeing and morale. During the assessment, we identified breaches of regulation relating to safe care and treatment, and good governance. We discussed the concerns with the management team during the assessment to enable them to begin taking timely action.
Staff levels were sufficient to meet people’s basic needs and recruitment processes were robust. Staff worked well together and communicated effectively. However, staff told us they felt unsupported and undervalued, which posed a risk to safe escalation of concerns and workforce wellbeing.
Care planning and risk management were inconsistent. Whilst assessments and plans were in place, records often contained contradictory or unclear information and were not always updated to reflect people’s current needs or following incidents. This meant staff could not rely on care records to deliver consistently person-centred care. We also identified risks relating to infection prevention and control, including areas of poor cleanliness.
Medicines were generally managed safely and there were systems in place to monitor safety and performance. However, governance systems were not always effective in practice, as leaders had not identified or addressed inconsistencies in care records, incident management and risk assessment.
Overall, while people experienced kind care from staff and some systems were in place, the service required improvement to ensure care was consistently person-centred, risks were well managed and leadership created a supportive, open culture that enabled learning and improvement.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives generally spoke positively about the service and told us staff were kind and caring. People told us they felt well looked after and comfortable. Feedback highlighted compassionate support, particularly at end of life. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI), to understand the experiences of people who were less able to communicate verbally.
We observed staff responding promptly to call bells and supporting people with their meals in a timely way. However, most interactions observed were task focused, with limited meaningful engagement, and some people told us there was little conversation or stimulation during the day.
We observed staff interacted with people in a gentle, respectful and patient way. Staff sought consent before providing care and supported people at their own pace. People were supported to make everyday choices, including where to spend their time and what to eat. At mealtimes, staff calmly offered options and provided support where needed, ensuring people were treated with dignity.
People’s independence was promoted where possible. Some people told us they could get up and go to bed when they wished and choose to spend time in their rooms. Others described being able to maintain routines that suited them. However, experiences were not always consistent. Some people and relatives told us call bells were occasionally delayed, particularly during busy times.
Feedback about activities and social engagement was mixed. Although an activities programme was in place, we did not observe activities taking place during our visit. Some people told us they would like more opportunities to go out or take part in activities, with one person saying, “It would be really nice to go out, I haven't been on an outing, and I'd like it very much, just to feel that connection with the outside world. I do miss that connection very much.”
Overall, the atmosphere of the service was calm, quiet and respectful. People benefited from caring and compassionate relationships with staff, although the environment was described as subdued with limited social interaction at times.