- Homecare service
Winners Trophy
Assessment report published 31 July 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 02 April 2025 to 21 May 2025.
We assessed the service because it had not previously been inspected, and we had received concerns about the leadership of the service in relation to staff working from overseas on a sponsorship license. We assessed 33 quality statements in the safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led domains. Lessons were not always learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Some people’s risk were not being managed safely and some people had not been safeguarded. Some care plans, risk assessments and relating documents contained conflicting information or in some cases did not have the information available. Care plans did not always have evidence-based guidance for staff to follow and did not always include person-centred information. The provider did not make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and processes to assess whether people had capacity to make specific decisions and to make best interest decisions on their behalf were not always in line with legislation and national guidelines. The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes and did not always promote people’s independence. Systems and processes to ensure people received safe care and treatment were not always effective. Staff provided mixed feedback about their well-being and the support they received from the provider. Overall, partners working with the service provided positive feedback about their experiences, however raised concerns about staff well-being due to long travel distances between home and work.
However, the provider assessed and managed the risk of infection and supported people to manage their health and well-being to live healthier lives. Staff told us they had enough time to provide support to people and were able to demonstrate how they adapted their communication needs for different people. Overall, staff were positive about their experiences from an equality, diversity and inclusion perspective. Staff knew how to report incidents to the registered manager.
We identified 6 breaches of the legal regulation in relation to person-centred care, need for consent, safe care and treatment, safeguarding, staffing and good governance.
In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.
We have also asked the provider for an action plan in response to some of the concerns found at this inspection.
This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a time frame within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.
People's experience of this service
We received mixed feedback from people being supported by the service. Some people told us their experience had been positive, however some people told us there had been some concerns. Where people had raised their concerns with the provider these had been rectified. Some people had access to care plans, risk assessments and were able to access daily notes via the electronic application system, however other people told us they did not have access to this information. People told us they were not asked for regular feedback about the service; however, they could get in touch with the registered manager if they needed anything.
People had access to the equipment they needed to be safe in their home environments and told us they felt safe and did not raise any safeguarding concerns. People told us the service responded to incidents or concerns. They told us staff arrived on time, stayed for the full duration and told us there had not been any instances where people had been left without support. Comments about staff were mainly positive and overall, we were told staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. 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.