KML Kare
- Home care
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2021
- Wallsend, North Tyneside, North East
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
2 ratings
Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.
15 months
since the latest rating was published.
4 of 26
rated home care services in North Tyneside are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
KML Kare: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in July 2025, down from Good.
| 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.
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: St Anne's Community Services - North Tyneside DCA (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and St Anthony of Padua Care Services (Outstanding, 1.4 miles away).
Nearest home care services:
- – ProAce Healthcare Services Ltd No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
- G St Anne's Community Services - North Tyneside DCA Good, less than 0.1 miles away
- RI Unisus Group Limited Requires improvement, 0.3 miles away
- – Magnus Care Ltd No overall rating, 0.3 miles away
- RI Home Healthcare Delivery - South Tyneside Requires improvement, 1.1 miles away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 29 July 2025 (assessment visit 1 May 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 8 May 2025 to 19 June 2025. The service is a care at home service providing support to adults of all ages living in their own homes. We gathered information from relatives of people who used the service, the registered manager, health and social care professionals and care staff.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring Good
- Responsive Good
- Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary
Recruitment records were not always in line with best practice guidance. Gaps in employment had not been accounted for, and appropriate references were not always obtained. The failure to safely recruit staff is a breach of regulation 19 (fit and proper persons employed). We found no evidence that people had been harmed, however, there was the risk of potential harm.
The provider had not submitted CQC statutory notifications in line with requirements. The failure to submit notifications is a breach of regulation 18(reg) (notification of other incidents).
Care records were not always person-centred; some documents were contradictory. Risk assessments did not always identify the risks to people or demonstrate actions had been taken to keep people safe. The provider’s quality assurance audits had not identified the issues we found. The failure to maintain appropriate care records, mitigate risks and have effective governance systems is a breach of regulation 17 (good governance). We found no evidence of negative impact on people using the service, however, there was a risk of potential harm.
Staff built up a good rapport with people who they cared for. The registered manager and provider had oversight of the service. Staff said the registered manager and office staff were approachable and supportive. Health and social care partners gave mixed feedback about the management of the service.
-
Safe
No rating
Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. This key question changed to requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.
-
Effective
No rating
Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. This key question changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
-
Caring
Good
Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
Good
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
-
Well-led
No rating
Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.
At our last assessment we rated this key question good. This key question changed to requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders processes did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.
Questions to ask the service
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 29 July 2025. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 29 July 2025. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 29 July 2025. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Kay Richmond
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Domiciliary care service
- Who it supports
- Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, People with an eating disorder, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)1 inspection report, latest 4 March 2023. Latest assessment published 29 July 2025; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.
The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.
Who runs it
- Provider
- KML Kare Limited
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 13434496 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from North Tyneside Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at North Tyneside Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0345 2000 109
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: North Tyneside Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does KML Kare provide nursing care?
- The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for KML Kare.
- When was KML Kare last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for KML Kare was published on 29 July 2025.
- Who runs KML Kare?
- KML Kare is run by KML Kare Limited.
- What is KML Kare's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 29 July 2025.
Contact
- Phone
- 0191 500 9745
- Address
- The Town Hall Business Centre, High Street East, Wallsend, NE28 7AT Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: St Anne's Community Services - North Tyneside DCA (Good, less than 0.1 miles away) and St Anthony of Padua Care Services (Outstanding, 1.4 miles away).
Nearest home care services:
- – ProAce Healthcare Services Ltd No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
- G St Anne's Community Services - North Tyneside DCA Good, less than 0.1 miles away
- RI Unisus Group Limited Requires improvement, 0.3 miles away
- – Magnus Care Ltd No overall rating, 0.3 miles away
- RI Home Healthcare Delivery - South Tyneside Requires improvement, 1.1 miles away