Home / Sources / CQC / Capital Homecare (UK) Limited
Source · CQC inspection

Capital Homecare (UK) Limited

Type Social Care Org Region London Last inspected 13 Aug 2021

Location rating: Not Yet Rated  View location on CQC

Location ratings by domain

Five CQC key questions

Ratings held for this CQC location, last inspected 13 August 2021. Ratings extracted from individual reports are shown separately below.

Safe
Not Yet Rated
Effective
Not Yet Rated
Caring
Not Yet Rated
Responsive
Not Yet Rated
Well-led
Not Yet Rated

Most recent report indexed for actions

The date and rating here are from an individual report, not necessarily the location's latest assessment. Report ratings are extracted with AI; verify the original PDF.

Type: Inspection report
Date: 13 August 2021
Rating extracted from this report: Requires Improvement
Actions indexed: 3 must-do 4 should-do

Read this inspection PDF

AI-extracted 17 Feb 2026

Earlier inspection findings

pre-2024 framework · 3 must-do 4 should-do

Must-do actions (3)

Legal requirements based on regulation breaches identified during inspection.

Must-do action 1 of 3
Must do
Responsive
Regulation 9 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Person-centred care
Regulation: Regulation 9 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Person-centred care
⚠ The provider was not providing support that was responsive to people's preferences and in some examples, restricting their right of choice. Regulation 9(1)
Must-do action 2 of 3
Must do
Safe
Regulation 12 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Safe care and treatment
Regulation: Regulation 12 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Safe care and treatment
⚠ Care was not always provided in a safe way. There were insufficient arrangements to respond appropriately and in good time to people's changing needs. This meant the provider did not always do all that was reasonably practicable to mitigate risks. Regulation 12 (1), (2)
Must-do action 3 of 3
Must do
Well-led
Regulation 17 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Good governance
Regulation: Regulation 17 HSCA RA Regulations 2014 Good governance
⚠ Care was not always provided in a safe way. There were insufficient arrangements to respond appropriately and in good time to people's changing needs. This meant the provider did not always do all that was reasonably practicable to mitigate risks. Regulation 17 (1) (2)

Should-do actions (4)

Recommended improvements to enhance service quality.

Should-do action 1 of 4
Should do
Well-led
The provider to update its framework of incidents management, covering how information was sufficiently shared with partners.
Should-do action 2 of 4
Should do
Safe
The provider consider current guidance on giving 'PRN medicines' and take action to update their practice accordingly.
Should-do action 3 of 4
Should do
Effective
The provider seeks advise from reliable sources to implement meaningful supervisions and appraisals.
Should-do action 4 of 4
Should do
Safe
The provider seeks guidance from reliable sources on developing an effective framework of investigating and analysing incidents and act to update their practice accordingly.