- Homecare service
Bluestar Care & Support LTD
Assessment report published 10 December 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Dates of assessment: 27 November to 02 December 2025. Bluestar Care Support Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes. The service supports older and younger adults who have physical disabilities, people living with dementia, people with a learning disability, autistic people and people with mental health conditions. At the time of our inspection 1 person was receiving the regulated activity of personal care.
We inspected 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. We found the provider was meeting the values of ‘Right support, right care, right culture.’
People were protected from avoidable harm; staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and acted promptly to share concerns. Systems for managing risk were effective, and support plans included detailed risk assessments tailored to individual needs. Infection prevention and control measures were consistently followed.
People received care that achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life. Assessments were thorough and involved people, their relatives and relevant professionals. Staff delivered care in line with best practice guidance, including the use of nationally recognised tools to assess potential risks to health. People’s feedback confirmed they were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and staff promoted independence, choice and control.
Care was responsive and person-centred. Staff adapted their approach to meet individual communication needs and preferences. Complaints were handled openly, and lessons learned were shared with the team. Information was provided in accessible formats to suit individual communication needs.
Leadership was transparent and inclusive. Managers were visible and approachable to people, their relatives and staff. There was a positive culture of openness and continuous improvement. Governance systems were effective in monitoring quality and managing risks, improvements were made following checks and audits. Staff felt supported and valued and told us they enjoyed working for the service. The provider worked collaboratively with professionals and engaged with the local community.
People's experience of this service
People told us they felt safe and well cared for by staff who understood their needs and treated them with kindness and respect. Relatives described the service as “very good” and said staff were accommodating, friendly and attentive. They told us staff took time to communicate with their loved ones in ways they understood, using gestures, facial expressions and known phrases. This helped people feel included and reassured during care. A relative told us, “We want to get [person] used to different faces, [person] is enjoying this which is lovely to see.”
People were supported by a consistent team who knew them well. A relative told us, “[Person] adores [staff member] very much.” They explained an ongoing ‘in joke’ the person and staff member have. The staff member also told us about the ‘in joke’ and how much the person appeared to enjoy it.
Staff promoted dignity during personal care, explaining each step and ensuring curtains were drawn for privacy. Relatives confirmed staff always sought consent before providing support and offered choices wherever possible. For people who did not use words to communicate, staff used observation and known cues to check comfort and preferences. This approach was reflected in detailed support plans and supported by family involvement.
People’s care was person-centred and responsive to changing needs. For example, when a person’s support was increased, managers worked with the family and professionals to ensure a smooth transition. Staff also monitored health needs, such as skin integrity, and promptly reported concerns to relatives and professionals.
Relatives told us staff were cheerful and engaging, which had a positive impact on people’s mood and wellbeing. People enjoyed familiar routines, watching favourite programmes and interacting with staff who understood their likes and dislikes.
Feedback showed people felt safe with staff and trusted them. There were clear systems for raising concerns, and relatives said they were confident issues would be addressed promptly. A relative told us, “I have never needed to complain, I would go to [member of the management team] to explain the problem, the company has been very supportive to let me know everything.”
Overall, people experienced compassionate, respectful care that met their individual needs and preferences. Staff demonstrated patience and empathy, creating a positive and inclusive environment where people felt valued and supported.