Beacon Health Group Limited

Updated 17 June 2026

Date of Assessment: 17 June to 3 July 2026. We visited the service on 18 June 2026. This service is a domiciliary care service, registered to provide personal care for people living in their own homes in the community. They provide support to people with a range of different needs including older people, younger adults, people who misuse drug or alcohol, people with an eating disorder, people with learning disabilities or/and autism, and people living with dementia or mental health conditions.

At the time of the assessment 8 people were using the service, all of whom were receiving the regulated activity of personal care. Not everyone who uses a domiciliary care service receives personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. The service is also registered to provide treatment of disease, disorder or injury but at the time of our visit, were not providing this type of support.

This is the first assessment for this provider under its new registration. At this assessment we reviewed all 5 key questions and all the quality statements. We rated the provider overall as good.

We assessed 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. This provider was able overall to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of ‘Right support, right care, right culture’.

The provider had systems in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and were confident in recognising, responding to, and reporting concerns. While the provider was reporting notifiable incidents to partner agencies and CQC, they were not fully aware of all incidents that required reporting to CQC and as a result some had not been submitted. The registered manager took prompt action to address this issue.

There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Staff received appropriate training, and the management team supported staff through regular meetings and supervisions. Recruitment systems were in place, but these needed to be reviewed to fully ensure the safe recruitment of staff. This was actioned immediately by the registered manager.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and staff were clear in their conversations with us of their responsibilities to seek consent.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated people as individuals and supported their choices.

Care plans were person centred and risks associated with people’s care had been identified and assessments in place to minimise risks occurring.

The provider worked in partnership with a variety of health professionals to ensure people received the right care and support.

Governance systems were in place to oversee and monitor the quality of care provided.

Updated 17 June 2026

People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support provided by the service.One relative told us, “Beacon have done really well and [Names of relatives] are happy.” Another relative told us, “They’re very caring, I don’t know anything like them. I really don’t.”

People and their relatives felt the support they received from Beacon Health Group Ltd was safe. One relative commented, “I’ve got no worries. They take [person] shopping and to their appointments. [Person] is safe with them, and I know I don’t have to worry about [person].”

People and their relatives raised no concerns about call times or consistency. One relative told us when asked, “Yes we normally have the same 2 carers every time.”

People and their relatives told us they received their medicines as prescribed. One relative told us, “[Staff] know all about that. They’re very hot on what the prescription says.”

People received person centred support that met their assessed needs, choices and decisions.

People and their relatives consistently told us they had regular contact and received good communication from the provider. Staff involved people and relatives in decisions about their care. People and relatives were encouraged to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. One relative told us, “I would say there’s a feedback loop which is encouraged. There’s good open dialogue.”