• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Bliss Care And Training Ltd - Barnet

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Central House, 6th Floor, Suite 09-11, 1 Ballards Lane, Finchley, London, N3 1LQ (020) 3372 5671

Provided and run by:
Bliss Care and Training Ltd

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 6 August to 3 September 2026. The service is a care at home service providing support to adults of all ages; some people were living with physical disabilities, long term health conditions, mental health needs and dementia. At the time of the assessment, the service was not providing the regulated activity of personal care to any autistic people or people with a learning disability, but the provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture.’ There were other people who received support from Bliss Homecare, who were also not in receipt of personal care. For these people we did not assess the quality of the care they received as we had no legal remit to. But the service did support about 200 other people with personal care.

At the last assessment the provider was in breach of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and having good governance monitoring and quality checks. At this assessment improvements were found so the provider was no longer in breach of these two regulations.

The provider had sustained good systems to ensure people received care at regular agreed times. People continued to see staff who they were familiar with and who they had formed a positive professional relationship with.

Improvements had been made in how medicines were being administered and monitored by the provider. People who were most at risk due to their health needs, long term conditions and choices they made each day; they had risk assessments in place. Improvements still needed to be made with some of the risk assessments and care plans the provider had created. These were too long, repetitive, unclear in places, and staff were not looking at them. Staff did not have a full understanding about how to respond and identify a potential safeguarding concern. The provider and management team gave us assurances these actions would be completed.

The provider and management team now had an oversight of risk management, of who was most at risk, so they could monitor these people’s needs. Care records, staff’s understanding and the application of the mental capacity act was now effective. Staff received relevant training to support the people Bliss Homecare provided care to.

The management team was responsive when a person experienced an injury and when they were alerted to potential safeguarding concerns. People received regular detailed reviews of their care and staff practice was monitored.

Auditing into the quality of people’s risk assessments, care plans, medication records and daily notes had improved. But there was still some further work required in relation to risk assessments, care plans, and daily notes.

During an assessment under our new approach

Bliss Care And Training Ltd – Barnet is a domiciliary care agency providing care and support to people living in their own houses and flats. At the time of our assessment there were c 156 people using the service. Not everyone who used the service received the regulated activity of personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care, such as help with washing and dressing. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided such as support to go out to do something they enjoy.

We assessed 32 quality statements across safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led key questions. We carried out our planned off-site assessment on 28 August to 2 October 2024.

The provider and managers had created a culture and systems to promote a person-centred care experience. People saw the same staff regularly and at agreed times. Staff did not feel rushed, and they felt supported by the management who were available if they needed advice and assistance in their work.

However, the management team and provider lacked an understanding of what effective risk assessments and management of risks looked like. They also needed to improve their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and how to apply it. This placed people at potential risk of harm. The management team and provider did, however, listen to our feedback, and gave us verbal assurances improvements would be made.