Areys Care

Updated 27 February 2026

Date of assessment: 2 March to 24 April 2026.

This was the first assessment since the service registered with CQC on 29 May 2023. The service is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the assessment, four people received support. One person was autistic and/or had a learning disability.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance because the service supported an autistic person and/or a person with a learning disability but was not registered as a specialist service. This helped us judge whether the provider promoted respect, equality, dignity, choice, independence and access to local communities.

Staff delivered day-to-day care with compassion. People and relatives consistently described staff as kind and respectful. Continuity of care helped staff build positive relationships and understand people’s needs. Cultural and language matching also supported communication and trust.

However, we found shortfalls in care records, risk assessments, medicines documentation and management oversight. Care plans were not always personalised. Some records used generic, task-based language and did not clearly describe how staff should support people in line with their preferences. Records did not always include what was important to people, including their interests, routines and personal preferences.

Risk assessments and medicines records were not always detailed, accurate or clear. Changes in people’s needs were not always reflected in records. Governance systems did not identify or address these issues before the assessment. Audits were not completed consistently and did not always show clear follow-up action. Training, supervision and competency checks were not consistently evidenced.

The provider was in breach of regulations relating to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing.

Updated 27 February 2026

People’s experiences were mixed. People and relatives spoke positively about individual care workers and said care was delivered with kindness and respect. One person said, “Yes, I feel safe.” People described visits as reliable and received support from regular staff.

People and relatives described that they had continuity of care and communication with the service was responsive. Some relatives said language and cultural matching helped communication and improved confidence and wellbeing.

Despite people and relatives providing positive feedback and expressing satisfaction with their care, the assessment identified aspects of care that did not meet the required standards.