• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Flawless Care Services Ltd - Vale House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Office 1 Vale House Business Centre, Aston lane North, Preston Brook,, Runcorn, WA7 3PZ 07480 852070

Provided and run by:
Flawless Care Services Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Good

Updated 14 October 2025

Date of assessment: 11 October to 29 October 2025. Flawless Care Services is a care at home service providing personal care and support to adults of all ages some of whom were living with dementia and physical disabilities. Not everyone using the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of this assessment there were 20 people receiving care and support. This was the first assessment of the service, and we reviewed all key questions and quality statements. The outcome of this assessment was a rating for the service.

Accidents and incidents were analysed to ensure trends and patterns were identified and changes were made to practice, to mitigate future incidents. People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and how to act on concerns. Risks associated with people's care were identified but risk assessments required more detail to ensure safe care delivery. Staff were recruited safely, and appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staff received training and support to help them carry out their roles effectively. Some people and relatives told us staff did not always stay for their allotted time. People received their medicines as prescribed by staff who were trained and competent to administer medicines.

People's needs were assessed, and care was provided in line with people's needs. People had access to healthcare services as required. The provider worked with people to ensure their expectations were met. People were involved in decisions about their care. We saw consent forms were in place where required.

People and relatives told us staff were caring and friendly. However, they told us some carers were better than others. For example, 1 relative told us their family member had lots of food in the house, but the carers opened a tin of soup instead. The provider had a key worker system in place where people were assigned a staff member to act as their primary point of contact. This included coordinating care delivery, liaising with family members and external professionals and advocating for people’s preferences, routines and cultural needs.

People's care plans gave a history about people, and their preferences were recorded. The registered manager told us people and relatives had access to information about the service and their care and support. However, a relative said, "I am not able to look at the notes, I don’t know of any that are at my relative’s house, so I don’t know how they are getting on, or if there have been any significant events or changes." People and relatives had opportunities to feedback about the care and support they received.

Most people told us that they would speak with the carers if they had a problem and wouldn't raise issues with the management team. The provider had a whistle blowing policy and staff were able to raise concerns about the service.Some governance systems required embedding into practice, to ensure they were effective.

People's experience of the service

Updated 14 October 2025

People were complimentary about the staff. One person said, “The carers are lovely. They come about 9am; they are friendly and very helpful.” One person said, “The carers are excellent. They are very good, and I give them top marks.” People and relatives told us they had developed good relationships and friendships with most staff, however people and relatives felt staff were sometimes under pressure. One relative said, “The carers are supposed to stay 45 minutes, but they don’t always stay that length of time, once they have done all the things they are supposed to do, they leave. It would be nice if they would stay the full time and just have a chat with my relative. I have rung the office and talked to them about it; things improve for a while then it goes back to shorter calls again. The carers don’t chat to my relative, they just come and do the jobs then go.” Another relative said, “Some of the carers are fine; [staff name] does their job really well and is really good. Some of the carers are not so good. I buy a selection of ready meals for [family member] so they have a good variety of meals, I have even left notes for carers to ask them to cook the ready meals but a lot of the time they just open a tin of soup and give that instead.” We also received some positive comments such as, “[Family member] loves the carers; they are part of their family now. They even tell the staff to go to the goody drawer where they keep all their sweets and to have some. They laugh and joke and they are really good with [family member].” Another comment was, “There is a lovely carer who takes [family member] shopping on a Friday, the call on that day is an hour and a half, [family member] is more than settled with [staff member name].”

We acknowledged the positive comments and raised the negative comments with the management team. We have commented on their response in the well-led section of our report.