- Homecare service
Frank Care Devon
We served a warning notice on Frank Care Solutions Ltd on 11 June 2026 for failing to meet the regulation relating to good governance at Frank Care Devon.
Assessment report published 12 August 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 28 April to 15 May 2026. The service was supporting 6 people to receive personal care when we began our assessment. The service is a homecare service providing support to people in their homes.
The provider was in breach of legal regulations relating to governance, safe staffing, and safe care and treatment.
The provider’s audit and oversight processes had not identified multiple issues or improved the quality of the service.
There was a poor culture between service management and the care staff. Care staff had raised concerns about the providers employment practices. In February 2026 the Home Office removed the providers visa sponsorship license which had enabled the provider to employ care staff from outside the UK. When we carried out this assessment, we found the same employment practices were being continued by the provider.
This provider’s approach had led to a considerable loss of care staff which had in turn led to issues with timekeeping in the delivery of people’s visits with some being 30 mins to 2 hours late. This timekeeping was causing people who used the service distress. In addition, staff were being inadequately recruited through the provider’s recruitment process and not adequately trained to deliver either basic or specialist care to meet people’s needs. People told us they did not have confidence in some of the staff who supported them.
The quality of direct care delivered by the care staff was usually described as being good. People were treated with kindness and compassion and had their privacy and dignity protected by the care staff. However, the service did not always respond to people’s concerns.
We did not check how the provider was meeting Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture on this inspection. RSRCRC is our statutory guidance on how providers meet the needs of autistic people and people with a learning disability. At the time of assessment there were not any autistic people or people with a learning disability using the service.
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.
People's experience of this service
Most people and their relatives said the care staff were generally polite, kind, compassionate and caring.One relative said, “The carers (care staff) are lovely”. Another person said, “They (the care staff) are polite and helpful”. Another relative said, “The carers (care staff) vary. All respect (the person) a lot. They are really polite. (The person) relies on their company. They are kind and helpful”.
Another person said, “They (the care staff) are lovely. I really do like them. They are patient and so kind and so gentle. Lovely people. They are very good indeed and I get on with them”.
People said they felt safe with the care staff, but due to a lack of staff skill, they at times did not feel safe with some staff. One person said, “Yes, I’m kept safe and carers (care staff) make sure I get what I need. Two carers (care staff) move me with a hoist and it’s safely done. Some (care staff) are really good and I like them. The others are not so good. I told the company about the ones that I don’t like. At the beginning they swapped carers, but they don’t have enough staff. So, I don’t get a lot of choice. They are not abusive. Just not competent”. Another person said, “As far as I know I’m safe. The carers are OK with me”.
Another person said, “They (the care staff) work hard and try to do things right. The good ones are really thoughtful and go out of their way to support me. Others just do the basic minimum. I’d say at the moment that’s 50% or 2 out of 4. I don’t have enough choice at the moment (of care staff)”.
People told us sometimes staff were late arriving to support them. We heard from people and relatives this had caused some people distress and anxiety. One person said, “Carers (care staff) can be sometimes late due to public transport and don’t always inform me. It happens maybe twice a week. By half an hour to two hours. Yes, it’s inconvenient and I have to wait if 2 carers don’t turn up. I told the company (about lateness)”.
The care staff were helpful to people and often did more than they were contractually required to do.One person said, “They (the care staff) get all my jobs done.” A person’s relative said, “The carers have a list of what to do and will also try to do the washing up. I tell them not to worry. They are brilliant and do everything. (The person) is happy”. Another relative said, “They (the care staff) know what (the person) needs. I don’t go in with the carers. (The person) is very satisfied with their care. They will do other things such as clean windows and make tea. Mostly they know what is needed and invariably respond to anything else”.
Peoples’ privacy and dignity was protected by the care staff. One person said, “They (the carer staff) keep me safe. They lock my door. I’m moved safely”. Another person said, “The (care staff) are friendly and helpful. They know me”.
Some people said they were not always given choice by staff, but others said they were always given choice. One relative said, “Yes, they will ask first. They are very good, more or less, at asking. We’re happy. What they do is basic”.
Communication between the registered manager / the service office, and people was usually described as good, but some people had had poor experiences. One person said, “They (the office) are pretty good. We’ve got no complaints”. Another person said, “There was an issue a few months ago (contacting the office). It’s better now. At that time, you couldn’t get any replies. I don’t think they treat their carers (care staff) very well”. Another person said, “Once I couldn’t get through as office staff had an emergency. For other requests, I have contacted them by e-mail and they responded. They sorted it out for me”.
Some people told us they thought the quality of the management of the service was good or adequate, but others did not think the service was well led. One person said, “I think it’s OK (the management of the service). Another person said, “At the beginning he (the registered manager) was good. But, he could do a lot better on communication and organisation”. They also said, “No, it’s not well led. It could be better. Carers are not treated well, and the good ones are leaving. Communications could improve. The (visit) rota changes at the last minute and sometimes they don’t plan ahead”.