Gogomadu Cares

Updated 27 May 2026

Date of assessment: 28 May 2026 – 16 June 2026.

This was a fully comprehensive assessment carried out in response to concerns we had about the service.

Gogomadu Cares is a home care service providing personal care for people living in their own homes. The Care Quality Commission [CQC] only inspects services where people receive personal care, this is help with tasks related to personal hygiene. At the time of our assessment, the service was supporting 14 people with personal care.

At the time of the assessment there was a manager registered with CQC. A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

We found the oversight of the service was not adequate. Systems were not robust enough to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service being provided to people.Although we did not find evidence of harm, we found shortfalls in relation to incident reporting, medicines management; staff recruitment; staff competency checks; risk management; care records; monitoring and audits.

The provider needed to strengthen their governance processes to enable learning, improvement and innovation that reflected current regulation and best practice, including the introduction of an effective service improvement plan.

We shared our feedback in relation to our findings during the assessment. Leaders of the provider were receptive to our feedback and told us throughout the assessment about plans they had to make improvements. We will check on the implementation of these plans at our next assessment.

We identified 3 breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, good governance and fit and proper person employed. This service has been rated Requires Improvement overall.

In instances where CQC have decided to take civic or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.

Updated 27 May 2026

Feedback from people and their relatives was positive about staff, who were described as kind, caring and compassionate. A person told us, “My two main carers have been absolutely brilliant, letting me do what I can and helping me as needed. I am grateful to my present carer, we get on and have a laugh.”

Relatives told us, “As far as I am concerned, they go above and beyond their duty, ” and, “There are 3-4 main carers who I have met, and they have good awareness of the triggers that contributed to the falls she has had.”

People told us they generally felt treated as an individual. For example, A person told us, “I feel they treat me like a person - I would not be able to go out if [they] wasn’t with me.” A relative told us, “Carers are helpful around their main role, for example, they will pick up extra prescriptions.”

People and staff provided us with examples of people being supported to be independent and have choice and control over their lives. For example, a person told us, “I am helped to get ready, we go on the bus, and I get on first to make it easier for me. I am supported to the craft club. I do like swimming and was going regularly, it helps me relax. At the moment I cannot swim, so we go to bingo.”

People and relatives told us they felt staff were responsive to people’s individual needs. For example, a relative told us, “I think they would recognise if [relative] was unwell. A while ago they contacted me to say [relative] seemed more confused.” Another relative told us, “I know carers would let me know if [relative] was unwell or seemed different. Carers leave me a note if any issues arise.”

Feedback about continuity of care was mixed. Some people and relatives told us they experienced consistent support from a small number of regular staff, which helped build trust and understanding. However, we also received feedback that continuity was not always maintained, particularly when regular staff were absent.