Bkind Care Ltd
- Home care
- Dementia care
- Registered since 2020
- Kirkstall, Leeds, Yorkshire and the Humber
Requires improvement
Rated on
Rating from the Care Quality Commission.
At a glance
3 ratings
Its last inspection improved it from Inadequate to Requires improvement.
8 months
since the latest rating was published.
22 of 132
rated home care services in Leeds are rated Requires improvement, like this one.
Bkind Care Ltd: inspection record
Rated Requires improvement in February 2026, up from Inadequate.
| 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: Bluebird Care Leeds North (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Right at Home North Leeds, Otley and Wetherby (Good, 0.5 miles away).
Nearest home care services:
- G Bluebird Care Leeds North Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Right at Home North Leeds, Otley and Wetherby Good, 0.5 miles away
- – Mental Health Accommodation Based Services - Spen Lane Not yet rated, 0.6 miles away
- G Epoch Homecare Ltd Good, 0.7 miles away
- – Sabin Care No overall rating, 1 mile away
What inspectors found
From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 24 February 2026 (assessment visit 19 November 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.
Date of Assessment: 2 to 16 December 2025. Bkind Care is a care at home service providing support to people living in their own homes. At the time of assessment, the service was providing care to 29 people who lived in Leeds. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. The Care Quality Commission (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 this assessment 20 people were receiving support with personal care.
- Safe No rating
- Effective No rating
- Caring Good
- Responsive No rating
- Well-led Inadequate
Read the rest of CQC's summary
The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations related to consent, safe care and treatment, and good governance. At this assessment, we found some improvements had been made in relation to seeking and recording consent, but we continued to find alack of compliance with the safe care and treatment and good governance regulations previously breached. We also found the provider was operating from a location that was not their registered address.
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.
At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability. The provider showed limited regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance.
We continued to find a lack of effective management and oversight at the service. The provider failed to implement effective processes to monitor and improve the quality of the service and identify the issues found during our assessment. Records were not always complete or contemporaneous. Management was not always following the regulations, best practice guidance or their own policies and procedures.
Staff had received mandatory training and had their competencies assessed, however staff did not always receive supervisions in line with the provider’s policy. The provider was registered to care for children, although was not supporting any children at the time of the assessment. The provider did not have relevant policies, procedures and training in place if they were to provide care for children.
Most risks to people were identified, assessed and monitored, but we found examples where risk assessments were not in place. We found further improvements were required to ensure the safe management of medicines.
There was a system in place to assess the capacity of people who required it, however we continued to find inconsistency with the provider's quality of records in this area.
People received support to maintain good nutrition and hydration, and their healthcare needs were understood and met. The provider kept in close contact with relevant healthcare professionals.
This service remains in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.
-
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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has 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.
The service continued to be in breach of legal regulation in relation to the management of people’s medicines.
-
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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
-
Responsive
No rating
Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.
At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.
-
Well-led
Inadequate
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 in adequate. At this assessment the rating has remained inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in leadership. Leaders and the culture they created did not assure the delivery of high-quality care.
The service continued to be in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance and oversight at the service.
Questions to ask the service
- Safe was rated Requires improvement on 24 February 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
- Effective was rated Requires improvement on 24 February 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
- Responsive was rated Requires improvement on 24 February 2026. Ask to see how care plans are kept up to date, how complaints are handled.
- Well-led was rated Inadequate on 24 February 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
Registration details
- Registered manager
- Leticia Tarisayi
- Registered with the CQC since
- What it provides
- Domiciliary care service
- Who it supports
- Children 0-18 years, Dementia, Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Mental Health, Older People, People who misuse drugs and alcohol, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment, Younger Adults
Inspection report
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)1 inspection report, latest 24 June 2022. Latest assessment published 24 February 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
- Provider
- Bkind Care Ltd
- Ownership type
- Organisation
- Companies House number
- 11161322 (opens Companies House)
Getting help from Leeds City Council
The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.
- Adult social care at Leeds City Council
- Ask for a care needs assessment
- Phone: 0113 222 4401, weekdays 9am to 5pm (Wednesdays from 10am)
- Support for carers
- Paying for care: Leeds City Council
Checked on the council's website, November 2026.
Common questions
- Does Bkind Care Ltd provide nursing care?
- The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Bkind Care Ltd.
- When was Bkind Care Ltd last inspected?
- The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Bkind Care Ltd was published on 24 February 2026.
- Who runs Bkind Care Ltd?
- Bkind Care Ltd is run by Bkind Care Ltd.
- What is Bkind Care Ltd's CQC rating?
- Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 24 February 2026.
Contact
- Phone
- 07753 170268
- Address
- Suite 2, Floor 1, Wira House, West Park, Leeds, LS16 6EB Map (opens Google Maps)
Compare nearby
Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Bluebird Care Leeds North (Good, 0.2 miles away) and Right at Home North Leeds, Otley and Wetherby (Good, 0.5 miles away).
Nearest home care services:
- G Bluebird Care Leeds North Good, 0.2 miles away
- G Right at Home North Leeds, Otley and Wetherby Good, 0.5 miles away
- – Mental Health Accommodation Based Services - Spen Lane Not yet rated, 0.6 miles away
- G Epoch Homecare Ltd Good, 0.7 miles away
- – Sabin Care No overall rating, 1 mile away