- Homecare service
CSPC Healthcare LTD
Assessment report published 11 September 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
About the service
CSPC Healthcare LTD is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care, to adults in their own homes in the community. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. There were 11 people receiving personal care at the time of the inspection.
Who the service is for
CSPC Healthcare LTD supports older people and younger adults. They support people with dementia, physical disability, sensory impairment and people who were autistic or had a learning disability living in their own homes.
Key findings
We carried out this assessment from 25 August 2026 to 8 September 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability, but the provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’.
People were protected from avoidable harm. The provider had effective systems in place to identify, report and respond to incidents and concerns. Managers and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of safeguarding processes and their responsibilities for escalating concerns. A staff member said, “I completed safeguarding training when I first started and then I have done it twice since then.” Risks to people were assessed and managed to support their safety and wellbeing, and staff were able to describe how they supported people to manage identified risks. There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs safely. The provider assessed risks within people’s home environments and implemented measures to support staff to work safely. Safe systems were in place for the management and administration of medicines.
The provider demonstrated they had safe systems in place to assess and manage the needs of people and provided staff with the information to do this in a timely manner, especially when people’s needs changed. The provider was able to evidence on how to deliver appropriate care to people, in line with their needs. They have systems in place to monitor people’s outcomes and alter care to continually improve people’s care.
Although the provider was not currently supporting people who lacked capacity, they had systems in place to ensure staff understood their responsibilities in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff had received training and were able to explain how they needed to support a person who lacked capacity in their best interests.
People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect by staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs and preferences. Staff described how they promoted people's dignity and privacy when providing support and staff took time to build positive, caring relationships with them. People's views, wishes and preferences were sought and respected, and they were supported to make choices about their daily lives and the support they received. Staff understood the importance of enabling people to maintain their independence and encouraged them to do as much as possible for themselves, providing support in a way that promoted choice, control and autonomy. A staff member told us, “I always ask people to do tasks that they can do by themselves like washing their own face.”
The provider placed people at the centre of their care and support. People's needs, preferences and desired outcomes were assessed and regularly reviewed to ensure care remained responsive to their individual circumstances. A staff member told us, “I support a person who is hard of hearing and if I am asking them simple questions or sharing information with them, I will stand close to their left ear and speak very loudly. However, if it is something more complicated, they have a pad where we can write it down and they can read it and then tell us their response.” Systems were in place to seek and act on people's views, enabling them to be involved in decisions about their care and support. The provider demonstrated a commitment to understanding people's diverse needs and reducing barriers to access and support. Care was delivered in a way that recognised people's individual characteristics, preferences and circumstances, which helped to promote equitable experiences and outcomes for people using the service.
The provider promoted a strong person-centred culture, with managers and staff sharing a common commitment to achieving positive outcomes for people. A staff member shared, “If we have any issues with people’s care, we can talk to the manager and they will help.” Staff spoke positively about the provider's values, leadership and support, reflecting a healthy and inclusive workplace culture. The provider worked with other professionals, to achieve the best outcome for people. A staff member shared with us,” We work with doctors, occupational therapist, nurses, opticians and dieticians, there’s a lot of professions that come out and we meet with them”. A professional shared with us, “They [person] seem to have a very consistent staff member who is wonderful with them and goes above and beyond for them. I have no concerns about [staff member’s] care of them [person].”
Our review of records and auditing systems identified some gaps in documentation practices. Responsibilities for completing and maintaining certain records were not always clear, resulting in inconsistencies in record keeping. Existing auditing processes had not consistently identified or addressed these issues, limiting the effectiveness of governance and oversight arrangements. This was discussed with the provider, and they informed us that they will review their auditing and record keeping processes and create an action plan to address the identified issues. However, we found other governance systems were effective in providing good oversight of the service, which were used to drive improvement in relation to risk, performance and outcomes.
People's experience of this service
People told us they experienced care from staff who understood their responsibilities for keeping them safe. People's concerns and feedback were listened to and acted upon, and they benefited from a service which reviewed incidents, accidents and concerns to identify learning and improve practice. People felt they were protected from the risk of abuse, neglect and avoidable harm. One relative told us, “My relative feels very safe and have no safeguarding issues whatsoever.” People said they benefited from staff who understood safeguarding responsibilities and recognised the importance of promoting choice, dignity and independence alongside their safety. Another relative told us, “If there were safety issues, I would be confident in contacting the office, but it’s not necessary.”
Information about people's communication and support needs helped ensure they were involved in decisions affecting their care and wellbeing. People shared they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their support needs to manage identified risks. People informed us their risk assessments reflected their individual needs, preferences and circumstances and focused on enabling people to continue undertaking activities that were important to them. A relative shared, “They are very caring and understanding of my [relatives] needs and there’s not really more you can ask of carers than that.” People told us there were enough staff available who had the skills, knowledge and experience to meet their needs safely. Another relative told us, “My relative gets the same six cluster of carers who alternate.”
People told us staff demonstrated a good understanding of their individual needs and preferences. Environmental and equipment-related risks were assessed and reviewed, which ensured people could move around safely and access the support they needed. People felt they received their medicines safely and as prescribed. A relative told us, “They understand the medication and what it’s for.”
People told us they received care and support in line with their assessed needs and helped them maintain their health and wellbeing. They said staff understood how to support them and followed advice from healthcare professionals when required. A relative informed us, “They [person] don’t stand well, and staff stand them and support them. If they [person] are not happy, staff don’t do it. Staff always ask them if they want to stand. If they do stand and they’re shaking, staff will support them to sit.”
Relatives told us they were kept informed of changes and involved in discussions about people's care where appropriate. People told us staff asked for their consent before providing care and respected their decisions and preferences. They described being involved in decisions about their care and support and felt able to make choices about their daily lives.
People told us staff were kind, caring and respectful in their day-to-day interactions. A relative said, “The carers show a lot of empathy; they are open to discussion and never rushing to get away.” They described positive relationships with staff and said they felt valued and listened to. Another relative informed us, “We can easily have discussions with the carers, and they will do whatever we ask them to do.”
People consistently told us they were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected. People shared they were encouraged to make choices about their daily lives and felt involved in decisions about their care and support. They described being able to maintain routines that were important to them and said staff respected their preferences and wishes. People told us staff encouraged them to remain as independent as possible and provided support in a way that promoted their confidence and wellbeing.
People told us they received care and support that reflected their individual needs, preferences and wishes. They said staff knew them well, understood what was important to them and adapted support to fit their routines and choices. People felt able to express their views and told us staff listened and responded to their feedback. A relative informed us, “I can also voice any problems with their [relative’s] care, and the carers will respond accordingly with any urgent attention.”
People described being involved in decisions about their care and said they were kept informed about changes that affected them. People felt their opinions mattered and staff acted on their wishes wherever possible. A relative said, “They do listen and change care when it's needed. The carers would certainly listen. They have seen the person’s decline in them and change care to meet their needs.”
People and their relatives spoke positively about the culture of the service and described it as welcoming, supportive and person-centred. One person shared “They are like family members; they are all good with me and we have no complaints. “They told us staff worked well together and consistently treated people with kindness, dignity and respect.
People told us they received consistent care from staff who understood their needs and preferences. Relatives said communication with managers was good and they felt confident concerns would be addressed appropriately. A relative said, “They [management] respond to any phone calls within two minutes.” Another relative shared, “I have a very good bond with management and office staff.”
People told us they were encouraged to share feedback about their experiences and felt their views were valued. They said staff listened to suggestions and responded when concerns were raised.