- Homecare service
Neighbourly Helpers Ltd
Assessment report published 7 July 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 15 to 22 June 2026. Neighbourly Helpers Ltd is a Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) registered to provide personal care. People were supported with their personal care needs to enable them to live in their own homes and promote their independence. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people received personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. Neighbourly Helpers Ltd is a specialist provider that is used by autistic people or people with a learning disability. At the time of this inspection 22 people were being supported with their personal care.
We carried out this inspection to assess and provide the first rating for the service following its registration.
We have 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. The service met the requirements of the ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance and promoted people’s rights, independence and equality.
People experienced positive, person‑centred support. People and relatives consistently told us staff knew their family members well, respected their individual needs and preferences and supported them to make day‑to‑day choices. Staff promoted people's dignity, independence and rights. People had access to activities they enjoyed both at home and in the community. Relatives said communication was open and responsive and staff involved them appropriately in people’s care.
People were protected from avoidable harm, and staff understood how to recognise and respond to safeguarding risks. Risk assessments and communication passports helped staff support people safely, including when they moved between services. Staff were recruited safely. When needed, people received their medicines as prescribed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. The provider’s policies and procedures supported this. People were encouraged to take responsibility for decisions and staff supported them to identify potential benefits and costs so they could make informed choices. The service was compliant with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), and appropriate assessments and best‑interest decisions processes to ensure people’s rights were maintained.
Staff recognised changes in people’s health and sought timely input from healthcare partners. Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to express their preferences and plan for the future. People had information presented in a way they could understand and in formats which matched to their individual communication needs.
People, relatives and staff believed managers and the staff worked well together. Staff felt supported, encouraged and motivated by the managers. Governance systems were in place and were used to monitor quality, respond to feedback and maintain oversight of key risks.
People's experience of this service
People consistently described staff as respectful, supportive and responsive, explaining that they were able to assist with a wide range of daily living tasks, including personal care, meals, drinks and social activities. One person said there was, “Nothing I can ask them to do that they can’t do,” and highlighted support with everyday tasks and outings.
People experienced continuity of care with many having regular carers they knew well, which supported the development of trusted and positive relationships. People were happy to engage with staff, with some expressing clear enjoyment and pleasure when staff arrived. Families described staff as helpful, reliable and reassuring, particularly when supporting access to activities and the community.
People experienced care which was unrushed and person-centred, with staff staying for the full allocated time or longer where needed. People and relatives described staff as caring, approachable and trusted, with some likening their relationships with staff or management to that of “a friend”. One person told us, “My [relative] loves them and gets very excited when they come in.” Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of people’s communication needs, including responding to non-verbal communication and behaviours, which supported effective engagement with people who had more complex needs.
People’s health and wellbeing needs were supported effectively. Feedback included examples of staff contacting GP services when required, managing medicines appropriately, and supporting people safely with mobility and equipment. People and relatives described staff as competent in managing risks such as epilepsy, choking and mobility needs, helping people feel safe.
People described a service which was responsive to their needs, with care adapted to individual preferences and circumstances. Staff supported people to access community activities such as parks and outings to places of interest. People and relatives stated any concerns or questions raised with the provider was addressed and responded to appropriately and they had faith in approaching any of the staff f they had any concerns.
People and families felt listened to and involved in care planning, with regular contact from the management team and opportunities to contribute to reviews. Managers were described as, “Approachable”, “Responsive,” and “Supportive,” maintaining contact through calls and visits and taking action where issues were raised.