- Homecare service
Royal Mencap Society - Central Hampshire
Assessment report published 7 June 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 20 March to 07 May 2026. This was an assessment of all 5 key questions in response to the information we held about the service. The service is a supported living service providing support to adults of all ages living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection 22 people were using the service. 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.
The service provides support for people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. 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. People were supported in accordance with this guidance. They took action in response to our inspection feedback.
The provider worked to continuously improve the service and ensure good outcomes for people. Audits were in place giving oversight of quality and risk concerns. However, these had not identified some recruitment practices, training records and policies needed improvement. The provider started making improvements during our assessment. The provider made available suitable mandatory training for staff. Medicines were administered appropriately where required by competent staff.
There was a positive learning culture, where the provider was proactive in seeking feedback and implementing learning to make improvements. People and their relatives knew how to give feedback and were confident the provider took it seriously and acted on it. People were protected and kept safe from abuse. Staff were happy to raise any safety concerns and felt they would be dealt with properly. There were enough staff in place.
People and relatives were consulted around how they wished their care to be carried out where possible. Although not all relatives we spoke with had been involved in people’s care and support plans. Staff understood and managed risks related to people’s care. Staff worked with stakeholders involved in people’s care to promote the best outcomes and safe transitions when people moved between services. Staff cared for people with dignity and respect and promoted their independence. People were treated with kindness and compassion and had a good level of consistency in care staff.
Leaders were visible and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. There was a registered manager in place at the time of the inspection. Staff felt able to give feedback and were treated equally. The provider worked with professionals in the local community to deliver high quality care.
At our last assessment the service was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, good governance and the submission of statutory notifications. At this assessment the service had improved sufficiently and is no longer in breach of these regulations.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 21 people and 10 relatives of people who used the service to gain feedback about their experience of receiving care from the provider. Not everyone at the service could provide verbal feedback. In these cases, we spent time with them while they were supported by staff, who helped us communicate in ways they understood. This enabled us to gain insight into their experiences of care.
People and relatives we spoke with were positive about how staff supported people, telling us they were happy and liked their staff. One person said, “OK” and gave a positive sign when asked about their staff. Relatives told us, “The care is excellent, [relative] seems happy and looks fit”, and “Staff are amazing with [relative].”
We were also told people received regular staff. A relative told us, “The staff are a regular team.”
Relatives did not have any concerns about medicines. One relative told us, “I am happy with [relative’s] meds.”
Relatives told us they visited their family member or staff would support them to visit them. Comments included, “I do not visit now. Every 3rd week [relative] comes to me for lunch.”
The provider worked well with other health professionals to get appropriate care and support for the person. Relatives told us staff told them about appointments or any concerns they had. One said, “Any appointments or issues they also report back to us on the phone.”
Relatives told us staff knew people’s needs well. One relative told us, “In the past we have made many complaints but now the staff are more permanent. They really know [relative].”
Relatives told us complaints were dealt with well. One relative said, “Any mention and things are fixed immediately.”
Although one relative told us they had contributed well to the care and support plan, most relatives told us they had not seen a care plan.