SafeAre people protected from abuse and avoidable harm?56%Requires improvement
See the breakdownHide the breakdown6 of 8 below good
Involving people to manage risksSome shortfalls
Learning cultureSome shortfalls
Medicines optimisationSome shortfalls
Safe and effective staffingSome shortfalls
Safe environmentsSome shortfalls
SafeguardingSome shortfalls
Infection prevention and controlGood
Safe systems, pathways and transitionsGood
EffectiveDoes care achieve good outcomes and a good quality of life?63%Good
See the breakdownHide the breakdown3 of 6 below good
Assessing needsSome shortfalls
Consent to care and treatmentSome shortfalls
Monitoring and improving outcomesSome shortfalls
Delivering evidence-based care and treatmentGood
How staff, teams and services work togetherGood
Supporting people to live healthier livesGood
CaringAre staff kind, compassionate and respectful?55%Requires improvement
See the breakdownHide the breakdown4 of 5 below good
Independence, choice and controlSome shortfalls
Kindness, compassion and dignitySome shortfalls
Responding to people's immediate needsSome shortfalls
Workforce wellbeing and enablementSome shortfalls
Treating people as individualsGood
ResponsiveAre services organised to meet people's needs?68%Good
See the breakdownHide the breakdown2 of 7 below good
Listening to and involving peopleSome shortfalls
Planning for the futureSome shortfalls
Care provision, integration and continuityGood
Equity in accessGood
Equity in experiences and outcomesGood
Person-centred careGood
Providing InformationGood
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
Governance, management and sustainabilitySome shortfalls
Learning, improvement and innovationSome shortfalls
Partnerships and communitiesSome shortfalls
Shared direction and cultureSome shortfalls
Freedom to speak upGood
Workforce equality, diversity and inclusionGood
Percentages are CQC scores from its newer way of assessing homes. ?
CQC scored 33 standards: 13 good, 20 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. ?
Magdalen Close Hostel is in the Requires improvement tier ?, with 56 other homes in Essex.
84% of rated homes here are Good or Outstanding (England: 82%).
Essex County Council runs Magdalen Close Hostel, a residential care home in Clacton On Sea, Essex with room for 22 residents. Its CQC registration covers people with dementia, people with a physical disability, people with a learning disability or autism and people with a sensory impairment.
56 other homes in Essex share its tier, “Requires improvement”. Food hygiene inspectors scored the kitchen 5 out of 5 in October 2025. 89% of homes in Essex also score 5. Oaklands, 0.6 km away, is the closest home rated Good. 3 of Essex County Council’s 4 rated homes are Good or Outstanding (compare care home groups).
CQC last rated the home in March 2026, giving it Requires improvement overall. Safe, caring and well-led were also Requires improvement. Effective and responsive were rated Good. That is down from Good in March 2018. Ratings in Essex are typically about 5 years old, which makes this one newer than most. Of the 33 standards CQC scored, 20 fell below good. The lowest was “independence, choice and control” (some shortfalls).
