- Homecare service
The Recruitment Partnership Also known as Total Care UK
Assessment report published 10 November 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of inspection: 14 July to 11 September 2025 . The Recruitment Partnership is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes who may be living with dementia, mental health, learning disability or a physical disability.
Improvements were required in the management of medicines to ensure safe and consistent practice across the service. This included strengthening medicine risk assessments, improving the accuracy of audits, and ensuring PRN protocols were clearly defined and followed. These shortfalls posed a risk to people’s safety and highlighted inconsistent approaches to medicines management.
Care records were not consistently updated, which created a risk of inconsistent care delivery, particularly by staff who were new or unfamiliar with people’s needs. The records did not always reflect the information shared by people and staff, meaning they failed to fully represent the personalised care being provided.
Governance systems were not robust or effective, which limited the provider’s ability to monitor and manage the service. Audits were either unavailable or lacked effectiveness, resulting in issues identified during inspection not being known to the provider. This demonstrated a lack of oversight and awareness of the improvements required and limited the provider’s ability to learn and improve the quality of care.
People were supported to make choices and were actively involved in planning and reviewing their care. Staff monitored people’s health, made appropriate referrals to professionals, and took action to maintain wellbeing, demonstrating a person-centred approach to care.
Staff were caring and compassionate, promoting choice and independence in ways people could understand. People’s privacy and dignity were respected, and care was delivered in line with their wishes. Diverse needs were acknowledged and met, with accessible information and communication support provided to ensure people’s voices were heard.
There were enough safely recruited staff available to meet people’s needs when required. Staff understood how to safeguard people from abuse and worked to protect them from the risk of infection. The registered manager was visible and approachable, and staff felt supported and listened to. Concerns and complaints were responded to appropriately and in line with the provider’s policy.
We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted
The provider was in breach of 2 legal regulations regarding medicine management, records and governance systems. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
The feedback we received from people who used the service was positive. People told us they felt safe. One person said, “The staff treat me well, they know what I need, and I feel safe with them.” Another person said, “The staff are very good, they always make me feel comfortable when they help me to wash.”
People and their relatives felt confident in raising complaints or concerns, and they knew how to provide feedback about the care received. Relatives told us staff communicated promptly about any changes in health and took appropriate action, including contacting healthcare professionals when needed.
People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who promoted their choices and independence. One person told us, “The staff ask how I am and always ask what I feel I can do myself. Sometimes I can do little bits myself.”
People told us staff supported them to maintain their independence by encouraging them to do things for themselves and provided assistance only when needed. People felt listened to and respected. People were actively involved in planning their care, ensuring it remained person-centred and tailored to their preferences.
People told us they had consistent care carried out by regular staff, which meant people felt comfortable as staff knew their preferences. People confirmed staff arrived on time and stayed the assessed amount of time required to carry out their support.
While the people we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards.