You are here

We are carrying out checks at Sova Healthcare - Leicester using our new way of inspecting services. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 11 March 2016

This inspection took place on 21 January 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office.

SOVA Healthcare Leicester is a domiciliary care service providing care and support to people living in their own homes. The office is based in Leicester and the service currently provides care and support to people living in Leicester. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people using the service.

SOVA Healthcare Leicester had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe with the care staff and the support they received. People were kept safe from the risk of harm. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to raise concerns. People had detailed assessments which identified actions staff needed to take to protect people from risks.

People were supported by the number of staff identified as necessary in their care plans to keep them safe. There were robust recruitment and induction processes in place to ensure new members of staff were suitable to support the people who used the service.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to ensure people were supported in line with their care needs and best practice. People confirmed that they had consistent carers who stayed for the length of time allocated and usually arrived on time. People also confirmed that calls were very rarely missed and that a duty manager was always available.

We found that people were involved in decisions about their care and support. Care staff sought consent before they assisted people and staff respected people's choices and decisions. People told us how staff cared and supported them with dignity and respect and encouraged them to be as independent as possible.

Care staff supported people to liaise with health care professionals if there were any concerns about their health.

People's plans of care contained good information about the support people required. Plans of care were written in a way that recognised people's individual needs and preferences and put the person at the centre of the planning process. The records we saw were complete and up to date.

The provider was responsive to people's needs. People were supported by staff they said they liked and care was delivered in line with their wishes. People told us they were aware of how to raise concerns. They were confident that any concerns would be responded to by the registered manager and provider.

People were confident in how the service was led and the abilities of the management team. There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, which included checks on care staff delivering care and review of people's care. The provider and managers were committed to providing quality care to people.

People who used the service felt they were listened to and were given opportunities to share their views and opinions about the quality of the service they received through surveys, reviews, home visits and telephone calls.

Inspection areas



Updated 11 March 2016

The service was safe

We found that recruitment processes for the service were safe and thorough and the service employed enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe.

Appropriate safeguarding policies and procedures were in place and staff had received training in safeguarding adults.

The risks people were exposed to had been assessed and there was information about how these risks could be minimised.

People were supported to receive their medicines in a safe way.



Updated 11 March 2016

The service was effective.

People had consented to their care and treatment and this had been recorded.

Staff were well trained and supported so that they could effectively meet people's needs.

People were supported to access and liaise with health professionals when needed.



Updated 11 March 2016

The service was caring.

People told us that staff were kind, caring and helpful and respected their privacy and dignity when they supported them.

Staff supported people to maintain and develop their independence.

People felt involved and consulted in their care.



Updated 11 March 2016

The service was responsive.

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered to meet their needs.

There was an appropriate complaints procedure and people knew how to make a complaint. People felt confident to complain and were confident that their concerns would be listened to and acted upon.



Updated 11 March 2016

The service was well-led.

The provider and management team provided good leadership and staff were clear on their responsibilities to ensure people received the quality of care and service they expected.

People expressed confidence in the management team to meet their care needs.

People's views were sought using a range of methods, including surveys and telephone calls, to check they were satisfied with the quality of the care provided.