Care Wisdom Services Ltd
Home care, Croydon
This service is registered but is not currently providing care.
Not enough evidence to rate
Inspected, but the CQC did not have enough evidence to give a rating.
Care Wisdom Services Ltd: inspection record
The squares stay empty until the Care Quality Commission publishes a rating.
| 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 | 2026 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | ||||||||||||
| Safe | ||||||||||||
| Effective | ||||||||||||
| Caring | ||||||||||||
| Responsive | ||||||||||||
| Well-led |
Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.
No ratings have been published for this service yet.
About the service
From the Care Quality Commission's inspection report published 5 January 2023. Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Care Wisdom is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection there was 1 person using the service.
What inspectors found
There were outdated policies in place with regards to safeguarding and complaints however, staff knew how to raise a concern if they had any. The person using the service, or their representatives were unaware of how to raise any concern or complaint. After the inspection, policies on safeguarding and complaints were updated to reflect correct information on how to raise concerns and to who.
There were no current quality assurance processes in place, the service had not been operating for very long so there was not enough evidence to see how effective governance processes will be. The provider had not collected sufficient information with regards to recruitment to ensure they were employing staff that were of good character and meet the requirements of the role. Following the inspection, the provider had ensured that the required information would be collected and recorded.
Read the full summary
The person using the service received care and support specific to their needs and wishes. The person's choices were respected, and staff involved the person in decisions in relation to the care and support being delivered. Staff had access to the person's care and support plan which detailed the level of support required.
Staff recorded the person's food and drink so that everyone involved in the person's care were aware they had sufficient fluid and nutrition during the hours they were supported. The person was supported by the same core staff and this enabled them to build a positive rapport with staff. Staff and the person were aware of how to raise concerns if they felt the need to do so.
The person told us they were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests, the systems in the service supported this practice.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. 'Right support, right care, right culture' is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
At the time of the inspection, the provider did not care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an
autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.
People were satisfied with the care and support received from staff and had positive things to say about the staff. However, as the service had only been operating for 8 weeks at the time of this inspection, we were unable to obtain sufficient information and evidence of consistent good practice to rate the service at this time.
Contact and registration details
| Address | 59 Stroud Green Way, Croydon, CR0 7BF |
|---|---|
| Neighbourhood | Monks Orchard, Croydon |
| Phone | 07477 857555 |
| Registered manager | Gladys Carthy |
| Registered with the CQC since | |
| What it provides |
|
| Who it supports |
|
| Inspection reports | 1 inspection report, latest 5 January 2023 (opens the Care Quality Commission website) The reports are on the Care Quality Commission website. |
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
| Provider | Care Wisdom Services Ltd |
|---|---|
| Ownership type | Organisation |
| Companies House number | 09961465 (opens Companies House) |
Nearest alternatives
- G Almond Care Providers Ltd Home care, 0.5 miles awayGood
- G CareOLine Carers Service Home care, 0.5 miles awayGood
- G Right at Home Croydon Home care, 0.6 miles awayGood
- – Peaceful Care Ltd Home care, 0.9 miles awayNot yet rated
- G Amethyst Home Care Limited Home care, 0.9 miles awayGood
Getting help from London Borough of Croydon
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at London Borough of Croydon
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0208 726 6500
- Support for carers
- Care home fee rates published by the council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Care Wisdom Services Ltd provide nursing care?
- The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Care Wisdom Services Ltd.
- When was Care Wisdom Services Ltd last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Care Wisdom Services Ltd was published on 5 January 2023.
- Who runs Care Wisdom Services Ltd?
- Care Wisdom Services Ltd is run by Care Wisdom Services Ltd.
- What is Care Wisdom Services Ltd's CQC rating?
- Inspected, but the CQC did not have enough evidence to give a rating.