During an assessment under our new approach
Dates of assessment: 30 April to 28 July 2026.
Humble Hands Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide care and support to people living in their own homes. CQC only inspects services where people receive personal care, such as support with personal hygiene and eating.
The Provider was registered in July 2024 but remained dormant until December 2025. This meant the service had not been providing personal care support to people. This was the agency’s first assessment. We also considered information of concern we had received about the Provider. At the time of this assessment, the agency was supporting 1 person.
We found the provider was in breach of regulations relating to staffing training and development, recruitment, safe care and treatment, and good governance.
Management oversight was limited due to the agency size and operating model. Both directors, one of whom was also the registered manager and nominated individual, were employed in other roles. The absence of a physical office and the geographical distance between management and the person receiving support meant day to day management, staff oversight, and the coordination of care were managed remotely, this reduced the opportunities for direct oversight.
Governance systems were not fully effective. Audits and checks had not been implemented consistently in line with agency policies helping to identify areas for improvement and learning. Records were not always accurate, complete, or up to date.
Recruitment processes were not robust. Required checks and information had not been obtained before staff began work to ensure their suitability. Arrangements for the induction, supervision, and development of staff were not delivered in line with the provider’s policies and procedures. Staff told us they felt supported in their role and had completed the training provided.
Care plans and risk assessments had been developed with the person receiving support. However, information was inconsistent and lacked sufficient detail to guide staff. Reviews had not been completed to ensure care and support remained accurate, effective, and responsive to the person’s needs.
Due to insufficient evidence, several quality statements could not be assessed. As a result, we were unable to award ratings at key question level or for the service overall.