Care at Home Gloucester

Updated 21 July 2026

Date of Assessment: 29 April 2026 to 29 May 2026. We visited the registered office on 6 May 2026 and supported living accommodation on 6, 7 and 8 May 2026.

We assessed all 33 quality statements across the safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led key questions. As a result of our assessment, we rated the service good.

People were safe and protected from abuse and avoidable harm.The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life. People received effective assessments and reviews of their health, social care and communication needs. The provider worked well across teams and services to support people.

We observed very good interactions between staff and the people they supported in all the supported living homes we visited. Staff were very person-centred and clearly knew people very well, showing a genuine dedication to ensuring the best possible care for those they supported. People were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion.

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 applied the principles of the ‘Right support, right care, right culture guidance, and the Real Tenancy Test, which is the guidance CQC follows to ensure that people in supported living arrangements have genuine human and tenancy rights.

Updated 21 July 2026

We received mostly positive feedback from people and their relatives. People and their relatives told us staff were kind and caring and people’s individual choices and independence were valued and promoted. We visited people in their own homes and observed warm, trusting and compassionate interactions. People received consistent person-centred care and support from the service. Most relatives praised staff and the management team. They said staff were committed to understanding people’s emotional, physical and social needs. From our observations, we found people were well cared for and lived in their own homes which were personalised to their tastes and sensory needs. We found staff were attentive and responsive to people’s needs and knew people well. People were supported to develop their communication skills and were given options to attend places and activities of their choice. A small number of relatives told us they required more support and communication regarding their family members which we shared with the registered manager who acknowledged their need and took immediate action to resolve.