- Homecare service
Marygold Care UK Ltd
Assessment report published 9 March 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Marygold Care UK Ltd is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care. At the time of this assessment, the service supported 4 people with personal care at various supporting living addresses. CQC only inspects the service received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.
CQC only inspects the service received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.
Assessment activity started on 4 February 2026 and ended on 24 February 2026.
The last rating for this service was good (published October 2019). This assessment was planned due to the length of time since our last rating. Following this assessment, the service remains good.
Some people using the service had a learning disability. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the service was meeting the principles of Right support, right care, right culture.
People spoke positively about the service, describing staff as kind, respectful, and attentive. Staff responded promptly to changes in people’s health and worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure continuity and consistency of care.
People were safely cared for. Risk assessments were in place, and they identified current risks to the person as well as ways for staff to minimise or appropriately manage those risks, including for positive risk taking.
People were safeguarded from avoidable harm. Staff were trained in how to identify and address safeguarding concerns.
Care plans included person-centred details about people’s needs and included their areas of interest and history.
People’s care and treatment achieved good outcomes and promoted quality of life. Assessments were completed, and care plans were reviewed regularly. Staff supported people to live healthier lives. Consent was respected, and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act.
There were enough staff. People were cared for by the same regular care workers. Staff received training and support to help them to do their jobs well. Staff were recruited safely with pre-employment checks taking place in line with current requirements. Staff spoke positively about working at the service and told us they were well supported by management.
The provider responded well when things went wrong. Staff learnt from incidents.
Management undertook regular governance checks and reviews of the service. This included audits of records, proactively seeking feedback from people and relatives, and observations of staff practice.
Staff responded promptly to changes in people’s health and worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure continuity and safe transitions.
People's experience of this service
We visited 2 supported living services as part of this assessment. People using the service could not always communicate with us so we undertook general observations to understand the experience of the people and their care and how staff interacted with people and supported them.
People spoke positively about the care and support they received. A person said, “I am totally safe in [care staff] company.” Another person said, “[Staff] go over and above. If I need any help with anything I can ask.”
A relative we spoke with told us they were confident their family member was well cared for by staff who understood their needs. A relative said, “The service is very good. [My family member] is very happy to live there.” Another relative told us, “The service is excellent, and the carers are very good.”
People were able to spend time the way they wanted. People could choose how to spend their recreational time and were able to go out in the community. Staff treated people well and were attentive to their individual needs. People felt able to complain and were confident that if they did, appropriate action would be taken, and improvements would be made.