Civic Care Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

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

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care was planned around the person, with strong attention to language, culture, religion, and gender preferences. Where someone wanted a care team that shared their cultural background, the provider arranged this. People said this approach felt respectful and personal, rather than task led.

Staff reported receiving hands-on support and mentoring to consolidate their learning, with managers providing regular check-ins and guidance to ensure staff felt confident in their roles.

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.

Each person was supported by a designated core team of care staff to promote consistency and continuity in their daily support. In addition, a reserve team was identified to ensure cover during periods of staff absence, which reduced disruption to people’s routines. Leaders worked in partnership with social workers to review and refresh care packages, including making timely adjustments to the number of hours provided when people’s needs increased. We saw that staff rotas were personalised to align with each person’s preferences and daily living patterns. Cultural and religious observances were also factored into care planning, ensuring people’s lifestyles and identities were respected in the way support was delivered.

Care and support were aligned with people’s personal goals and preferences, such as improving English language skills and re-engaging with community hubs and social activities. Staff worked proactively with people to identify these aspirations during assessments and care plan reviews. Where people’s needs changed, the provider held timely multi-agency reviews and liaised closely with commissioners, healthcare professionals, and local partners to ensure care packages were adapted without delay. This approach supported continuity of care and enabled people to remain safely and independently in their own homes wherever possible.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Communication needs were thoroughly identified, documented, and acted upon to ensure people received information in ways they could understand. Care plans clearly recorded individual communication preferences, which were flagged on the provider’s electronic system, so that all staff had immediate access to up-to-date guidance. This promoted consistency and reduced the risk of important details being overlooked. Where people’s first language was not English, the provider made use of bilingual carers to aid understanding and used interpreters where this was necessary. For people who benefitted from alternative formats, information was produced in easy-read and large print, and text message reminders were also used to support engagement and reduce anxiety about upcoming visits.

Family involvement was actively encouraged. Where people requested that their next of kin received regular updates, staff provided daily contact, which relatives told us gave them reassurance and confidence in the care provided. Professionals were also kept well-informed. Social workers confirmed that the provider shared timely information, either through written reports or telephone updates, so that care packages could be monitored effectively. The use of an electronic care monitoring system meant that care records, incidents, and communication logs were visible in real time, supporting both transparency and the continuity of care across staff teams.

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.

People and families said the service listened and acted. Managers checked in, adjusted times and care tasks quickly, and rematched carers when language or personal preferences required it. Staff described a culture where feedback was welcomed.

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

People received care and support in line with their assessed needs, and the provider ensured this was delivered equitably, regardless of a person’s background, language, or culture. Barriers to access were removed by carefully matching carers who spoke the same language or understood a person’s cultural background, which helped promote trust and effective communication.

Information was made available in accessible formats, including bilingual support, interpreters, large-print materials, and easy-read documents where needed. Care plans also reflected people’s religious beliefs and practices, and visit times were adjusted during periods of fasting to accommodate prayer routines, fasting periods, and attendance at places of worship.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The provider had a structured programme of training and mentoring that covered equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), unconscious bias, and the identification and removal of practical barriers to care. This included targeted support for carers with limited English literacy, ensuring they could successfully complete mandatory training, understand policies, and accurately maintain care records. Recruitment processes were designed to build a workforce reflective of the diverse communities supported, with staff from varied cultural, linguistic, and religious backgrounds. Through ongoing supervision, competency checks, and mentoring, leaders ensured that people consistently experienced fair, equitable, and personalised care tailored to their assessed needs.

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.

The provider had systems in place to plan for people’s future needs, even though no one receiving support at the time of the inspection was on an end-of-life or palliative care pathway. Leaders demonstrated that the service was equipped to support people sensitively and effectively should such needs arise.

Staff told us they had received relevant training in areas such as advance care planning, person-centred risk assessment, and supporting people with dignity and compassion at the end of life. The registered manager explained that the provider maintained established links with local healthcare professionals, including district nursing teams and GPs, to ensure that future palliative or end-of-life care could be planned and delivered collaboratively.

People’s care plans included prompts to discuss future preferences and aspirations, where appropriate.