Rated Care Homes

Cloud 9 Care Limited

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 3 ratings

    Rated Good at every inspection since 2016.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 258 of 298

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

Cloud 9 Care Limited: inspection record

Home care, Essex

Rated Good in July 2026.

Cloud 9 Care Limited: 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. –
    Butterfly's Care Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    Jadee's Nursing Agency Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Fuchsia Homecare Colchester Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
  4. –
    Lee Care Services Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Stivic Care Services Ltd Good, 0.3 miles away

See all home care services in Essex

See all home care services in Colchester

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 9 July 2026 (assessment visit 18 June 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

About the service

This service is a domiciliary care agency providing support to people in their own homes. There were 45 people in receipt of a regulated activity at the time of the inspection. This service supports older people and people with physical disabilities who are living in their own homes.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Key findings
We carried out this assessment on 18 June 2026 to 09 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
Safeguarding systems were in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse, staff understood their responsibilities and were knowledgeable about different types of abuse and how and who they would report concerns to. Staff understood the process of recording accidents and incidents, including escalating concerns to leaders. Incident reports were regularly analysed to identify any themes or trends to improve people’s safety. Risks to people were identified and actions in place to mitigate risks, including environmental safety.
We checked and found that staff and management worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions, they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

Staff had received training and ongoing support from leaders to ensure they had the training and competence to carry out their roles safely and effectively; this included the safe administration of medication. Medication audits were completed by the leaders ensuring oversight and identifying any shortfalls.
The service demonstrated a culture of person-centred care, where staff understood people as individuals and adapted support to meet their needs. Staff promoted people’s independence and dignity with evidence of positive outcomes. People’s health and wellbeing were monitored, with appropriate escalation to professionals when concerns were identified
Care was delivered by competent staff who knew people well. This also supported staff to recognise changes in people’s needs and respond effectively.
Care plans were person centred and provided staff with detailed information on how to support people based on their assessed needs, choices and preferences. A staff member said, “I find the care plans to be really helpful.” Another staff member said, “They are very helpful they are very up to date if anything is changed, they are updated almost immediately.” Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse.
The service demonstrated an understanding of the importance of ensuring that people with protected characteristics experienced equitable care, support, and outcomes, without disadvantage or discrimination.

Leaders had developed weekly memos as a structured tool for communication, reflection, learning and continuous improvement, capturing detailed examples of care delivery to demonstrate what has worked well and how practice could be developed further. All staff we spoke to told us this was integral to shared learning and driving improvement within the service.
Systems were in place to support the safety and effectiveness of the service, including live alerts to monitor care delivery, supporting oversight and ensuring people received their planned care. Audits were completed regularly by leaders. Leaders were positive in receiving feedback and were proactive in seeking improvements. For example, some daily notes identified as not always showing clear communication and escalation for people. Therefore, leaders implemented an action plan that was put into place for additional audits around visit times, log ins and visit notes. The service also implemented further reviewing of escalation recording as part of their action plan.

We received positive feedback from staff in relation to their experience of working at the service. All staff described feeling supported and spoke positively about working for the service, with one staff member saying, “I feel very supported and morale is good, staff are valued and it’s a caring company.” Most staff told us that they did find travel time a challenge and that they were not allocated enough time and they were often making this time up in other parts of their days. This feedback was shared with the registered manager to support ongoing improvement within the service.

  1. Safe

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained a 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
  2. Ask how visit times are agreed and who covers when your usual carer is away.

Registration details

Registered manager
Rachel Van Staveren
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)

2 inspection reports, latest 10 May 2019. Latest assessment published 9 July 2026; 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

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
03058907 (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 Cloud 9 Care Limited provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Cloud 9 Care Limited.
When was Cloud 9 Care Limited last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Cloud 9 Care Limited was published on 9 July 2026.
Who runs Cloud 9 Care Limited?
Cloud 9 Care Limited is run by Cloud 9 Care Limited.
What is Cloud 9 Care Limited's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 9 July 2026.

Contact

Phone
01206 862368
Address
47 Moorside Business Park, Moorside, Colchester, CO1 2ZF Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. –
    Butterfly's Care Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. G
    Jadee's Nursing Agency Good, 0.1 miles away
  3. RI
    Fuchsia Homecare Colchester Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
  4. –
    Lee Care Services Not yet rated, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Stivic Care Services Ltd Good, 0.3 miles away

See all home care services in Essex

See all home care services in Colchester