Egeh’s Care · Homecare agency · Islington, London
Per CQC’s published rating, dated 21 March 2023, Egeh’s Care holds Good overall and Good on all five key questions — no breaches, no enforcement. That rating was earned under the framework the Single Assessment Framework replaced: statement-level scoring reached homecare in December 2023, and every homecare rating published since October 2024 has been issued that way — a method Egeh’s Care has never been measured under. CQC last looked in July 2023 — a desk review that left the rating standing — and the framework that replaced the one behind the rating is itself being replaced at the end of 2026.
The 30-second read
Taken by Alexey Litvin, GreenM’s CEO. Nothing to prepare — we bring the analysis.
Overall rating
Good
Key questions
5 of 5Good
Report published
21 Mar 2023
Scored baseline
Nonepre-dates statement scoring
of England’s 8,611 rated homecare agencies still carry a rating from before statement-level scoring. Egeh’s Care is in the majority, not an outlier — and that majority is the queue the current framework is working through.
homecare agencies already hold a rating issued under the current framework — scored statement by statement. One in five of them sits below Good.
of services rated below Good under the current framework — across all sectors — were marked down on well-led. It is almost never the care; it is the evidence of governance.
Nothing here says the service has slipped — CQC reviewed its monitoring information in July 2023 and left the rating standing. What the timeline shows is drift: the rating has stayed still while the method behind it has moved twice.
The six shifts from the guide you downloaded are the rules this read is scored against — no need to repeat them here. The one that matters most for a rating like Egeh’s Care’s: under the draft frameworks each key question is judged against written descriptors, so a weak statement can no longer be averaged away by its neighbours. Consultation on the drafts closed 12 June 2026; pilot assessments run June–October, with CQC targeting 9,000+ reports by September.
For most providers that calculation can be run on their scored statements. Egeh’s Care has none to run it on — the March 2023 assessment pre-dates statement scoring entirely. That absence is the exposure: there is no current, scored baseline to defend, and the first one will be written under descriptors the service has never been measured against.
Of the 2,147 homecare agencies rated under the current framework, one in five sits below Good (20.6% — against 23.3% across all 7,471 services rated under it). The profile of where they fall is lopsided: well-led sits below Good at 23.7% of them and safe at 20.3% — against 5% for caring. Nationally, where a service of any kind falls below Good, well-led is implicated 98% of the time. London reads the same way in kind: 70% of the capital’s 1,459 rated homecare agencies still carry a pre-scoring rating, and of the 434 rated under the current framework, one in seven sits below Good.
The six statements homecare agencies score weakest, cohort-wide:
Typical findings when this statement scores low: audit actions identified but not tracked to closure, oversight living in individuals rather than systems, and governance evidence scattered between visit records and office files.
Typically: recruitment checks incomplete on file, induction and supervision that happen but are not documented, and spot checks of care practice without a recorded trail.
Typically: risk assessments built from templates rather than the person, the person’s own voice missing from their plan, and reviews that cannot be evidenced after a change in need.
Typically: MAR audit inconsistencies, missing PRN protocols, and care-plan gaps around complex conditions — diabetes, epilepsy, Parkinson’s — that inspectors name specifically.
Typically: no closed loop from incident to learning to practice change, training records that lag reality, and improvement work that is real but invisible on paper.
Typically: mental capacity assessments that are not decision-specific, best-interest decisions not documented, and consent recorded once rather than revisited as needs change.
This pattern is most of what we would walk through live — the 30-minute walkthrough starts from where Egeh’s Care sits against it.
The strengths in the 2023 report are real and worth holding on to — and they were recorded against the service as it was then. Both halves matter.
“The service ensured people’s safety was fully assessed and managed.” Inspectors recorded risks identified at initial assessment, systems to review and update them, and staff guidance in place.
Pre-employment checks on all new staff, sufficient staff in post, induction on starting, annual training refresh, regular supervision from the registered manager and spot checks of care practice.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” — support in the least restrictive way, relatives involved in decisions, and preferences including cultural and religious ones respected.
“The service was relatively new and there had been no incidents, accidents or other concerns raised at the time of our inspection.” Three people were receiving support with personal care. The rating rests on evidence from that service, at that scale, in early 2023.
From the public register we can see Egeh’s Care’s published position and the pattern across every homecare agency already rated under the current framework. What we cannot see from outside is where the service’s evidence sits today against statements that did not exist in March 2023 — how visit records and call logs run, how medicines audits close, how supervision and spot checks are documented, and how the service as it runs today compares with the three-person service the 2023 report describes. That is not a gap in the service; it is the limit of what a register read can honestly claim. It is also precisely what the 30 minutes establishes.
Six items, drawn from this service’s register position and the homecare cohort’s weak pattern. None of them is homework — each turns on something only your side of the table can see.
Turns on which of the current framework’s quality statements — and the sector-specific questions replacing them — the service could evidence tomorrow, and which have no owner yet.
Turns on where CQC-relevant data actually lives — visit and call records, medicines records, the incident log, complaints, staff files — and who owns each on an ordinary day.
Turns on how audit findings travel to closed actions in your records; the cohort’s weakest scored statement (2.47 / 4, 38% below Good) and the key question implicated in 98% of downgrades nationally.
Turns on how the recruitment, induction, supervision and spot-check trail the 2023 report praised looks at the service’s current size — the second-weakest area in the homecare cohort.
Turns on what the service’s notifications, complaints and workforce returns have been saying since the July 2023 desk review — under continuous assessment, silence reads as risk, not as a clean record.
Turns on what the first four items surface — named, owned, and made the next six months’ priorities rather than the week before a visit.
