Rated Care Homes

Manifolds care

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 1 rating

    Only one rating on record, so there is no trend to show yet.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 258 of 298

    rated home care services in Essex are rated Good, like this one.

Manifolds care: inspection record

Home care, Essex

Rated Good in July 2026.

Manifolds care: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

  1. –
    Ablecross Limited No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Amor Social Care Ltd Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Caremax Homecare Services Limited Requires improvement, less than 0.1 miles away
  4. G
    De Vere Care Partnership – South West Essex Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  5. G
    Ebony Healthcare Services Limited Good, less than 0.1 miles away

See all home care services in Essex

See all home care services in Brentwood

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 9 July 2026 (assessment visit 27 May 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: 13 April 05 May 2026. The service is a care at home service providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our assessment there were 4 people receiving personal care. We carried out this assessment following a review of the information we held about the service. This was the first inspection since the provider registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in February 2022.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

At the time of our assessment, we found the provider was delivering care that did not fully align with their registration conditions. The provider has a condition in place which restricts them from supporting people whose primary presenting need is a learning disability or autism.

The provider was supporting 2 people with a diagnosed learning disability. Although the provider told us both people’s primary need was physical health, 1 person was receiving a 24-hour care package. This meant staff provided continuous support, including aspects of care related to their learning disability. We discussed this with the provider and advised them to submit an application to CQC if they intended to continue supporting people with these needs, to ensure their registration accurately reflected the care being delivered. The provider told us they would submit this immediately. Staff demonstrated a good awareness of people’s needs, and the provider had delivered training in this area.

Governance systems did not provide sufficient oversight of the service. Although the registered manager told us they visited people frequently, they did not consistently record these visits, which limited evidence of oversight. The provider’s quality assurance processes had not identified the concerns highlighted during this inspection, reducing opportunities for learning and improvement.

Risk assessments were robust; however, the provider needed to strengthen monitoring arrangements to ensure staff followed guidance within care plans. Mental Capacity Act documentation was not always clear or decision specific. Care plans were detailed and included specialist guidance where required.

Recruitment processes did not always ensure risks were fully mitigated and required improvement.

People received care from staff who treated them with kindness and respect. Care plans reflected people’s preferences, routines and cultural needs. Staff had access to detailed communication guidance to support people with complex needs.

  1. Safe

    Good

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.

    This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    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.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. 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.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 9 July 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  2. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
  3. Ask how visit times are agreed and who covers when your usual carer is away.

Registration details

Registered manager
Ademola Oyedele
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults

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

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
12469628 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Essex County Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Manifolds care provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Manifolds care.
When was Manifolds care last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Manifolds care was published on 9 July 2026.
Who runs Manifolds care?
Manifolds care is run by Manifolds Group Ltd.
What is Manifolds care's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 9 July 2026.

Contact

Address
The Drive, Great Warley, Brentwood, CM13 3FR Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. –
    Ablecross Limited No overall rating, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Amor Social Care Ltd Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Caremax Homecare Services Limited Requires improvement, less than 0.1 miles away
  4. G
    De Vere Care Partnership – South West Essex Good, less than 0.1 miles away
  5. G
    Ebony Healthcare Services Limited Good, less than 0.1 miles away

See all home care services in Essex

See all home care services in Brentwood