• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Main Site

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Unit 49B, Flexspace, Burley Road, Burley Hill Trading Estate, Leeds, LS4 2PU 07429 947994

Provided and run by:
Blue Arrow Healthcare Ltd

Assessment report published 25 March 2026

On this page

Responsive

Requires improvement

9 March 2026

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first inspection for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Person-centred Care

Score: 2

People generally received care that was centred around their needs. People and relatives told us staff were responsive. However, we found care records were not always fully person-centred.

Care plans and risk assessments lack detailed in some essential areas which could place people at risk of not receiving care that was current to their needs and preferences. We found no evidence of negative impact from these inconsistencies, but this could impact on the provision of person-centred care. We shared our feedback with the registered manager and during our inspection, the provider reviewed care plans and risk assessments to ensure these were consistent and up to date.

Care provision, Integration and continuity

Score: 3

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The management team and staff were knowledgeable about people’s health needs and knew which services were available if people required a referral to other healthcare professionals, to address any changes to their needs. The registered manager told us how they supported people and relatives to access other resources in the community by sign posting to local community services.

Providing Information

Score: 2

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s communication needs were assessed, and the registered manager gave us examples of how people specific communication requirements were met by staff, who adapted their communication when required by using visual aids, objects of reference or specific words.

Listening to and involving people

Score: 3

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

There was a complaints policy and procedure in place. We reviewed the provider’s complaints log and found this was managed appropriately.

Equity in access

Score: 3

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

In our conversations with staff and the registered manager, and review of information, we did not find evidence of concerns in relation to people using the service being discriminated against or not having access to the care they required.

Equity in experiences and outcomes

Score: 2

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this.

We found a lack of evidence of people being involved in the review of their care. Whilst people and relatives told us it was easy to speak with management if required, feedback received and records of care did not show regular care reviews were taking place to monitor people’s outcomes and make any changes to the care being provided. Relatives told us, “We have a care plan, but I don’t think it’s been revised” and “We had a care plan, and it was reviewed and kept up to date, although I didn’t review it directly with Blue Arrow.”

Planning for the future

Score: 2

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

At the time of our inspection, there was no one receiving end of life care. The provider had an end-of-life care policy in place, and we reviewed the processes in place to ensure people received care in a timely way.