SafeAre people protected from abuse and avoidable harm?69%Good
See the breakdownHide the breakdown2 of 8 below good
Safe and effective staffingSome shortfalls
Safe environmentsSome shortfalls
Infection prevention and controlGood
Involving people to manage risksGood
Learning cultureGood
Medicines optimisationGood
Safe systems, pathways and transitionsGood
SafeguardingGood
EffectiveDoes care achieve good outcomes and a good quality of life?67%Good
See the breakdownHide the breakdown2 of 6 below good
Monitoring and improving outcomesSome shortfalls
Supporting people to live healthier livesSome shortfalls
Assessing needsGood
Consent to care and treatmentGood
Delivering evidence-based care and treatmentGood
How staff, teams and services work togetherGood
CaringAre staff kind, compassionate and respectful?50%Requires improvement
See the breakdownHide the breakdown5 of 5 below good
Independence, choice and controlSome shortfalls
Kindness, compassion and dignitySome shortfalls
Responding to people's immediate needsSome shortfalls
Treating people as individualsSome shortfalls
Workforce wellbeing and enablementSome shortfalls
ResponsiveAre services organised to meet people's needs?50%Requires improvement
See the breakdownHide the breakdown7 of 7 below good
Care provision, integration and continuitySome shortfalls
Equity in accessSome shortfalls
Equity in experiences and outcomesSome shortfalls
Listening to and involving peopleSome shortfalls
Person-centred careSome shortfalls
Planning for the futureSome shortfalls
Providing InformationSome shortfalls
Well-ledIs the home well managed, with a culture of high-quality care?57%Requires improvement
See the breakdownHide the breakdown5 of 7 below good
Capable, compassionate and inclusive leadersSome shortfalls
Freedom to speak upSome shortfalls
Governance, management and sustainabilitySome shortfalls
Learning, improvement and innovationSome shortfalls
Shared direction and cultureSome shortfalls
Partnerships and communitiesGood
Workforce equality, diversity and inclusionGood
Percentages are CQC scores from its newer way of assessing homes. ?
CQC scored 33 standards: 12 good, 21 below good. Use “See the breakdown” on each key question for its standards. ?
CQC hasn't inspected this home for more than 5 years. It re-inspects based on risk, so an old rating doesn't count against a home on this site, but it may not reflect the home today. ?
CQC's register shows no registered manager for this home. Every care home must have one. The home may be recruiting, or a new manager may be applying to CQC. ?
King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities is in the Requires improvement tier ?, with 27 other homes in Leicestershire.
81% of rated homes here are Good or Outstanding (England: 82%).
King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities in brief
Leonard Cheshire Disability runs King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities, a residential care home in Sileby, Leicestershire with room for 18 residents. It is registered to care for older people, younger adults, people with a physical disability and people with a learning disability or autism. The typical home in Leicestershire has 30 beds, so this one is on the small side.
27 other homes in Leicestershire share its tier, “Requires improvement”. The kitchen has a food hygiene rating of 4 (good), from July 2024. In Leicestershire, 82% of homes score 5. There is no registered manager on CQC's register right now. It is one of 34 homes run by Leonard Cheshire Disability. 19 of those with a rating are Good or Outstanding. About 0.3 km away, Highbury Residential Home is rated Good.
The current CQC rating is Requires improvement, published in June 2026. Caring, responsive and well-led were also Requires improvement. For safe and effective, the rating was Good. That is down from Good in December 2018. The typical rating in Leicestershire is about 4 years old, so this one is fairly recent. CQC found some shortfalls in “independence, choice and control”, one of 21 standards out of 33 scored below good.
