Jewel Home Care

Updated 17 March 2026

Date of assessment: 28 April 2026 to 7 May 2026

Jewel Home Care is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of inspection, 13 people were using the service. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

This inspection was completed to check compliance with previous breaches of legal regulation.

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.

The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to safe care and treatment and good governance.

There was a lack of reliable, person-centred guidance in several high risk areas, which meant support was not consistently safe or well-coordinated. In particular, risks linked to complex conditions such as epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, oxygen dependency and pressure area care were not consistently identified, recorded or managed through clear instructions that staff could follow.

Records did not demonstrate people were consistently receiving safe, effective care that met their needs. Records contained gaps, inconsistencies and conflicting guidance, including examples where documentation directed staff to take actions that did not align with prescribed medicines. We were not assured that staff had the right information to recognise deterioration early, respond appropriately, and escalate concerns in a timely way.

The service did not demonstrate a culture that consistently supported safe care, effective oversight and continuous improvement. This was a follow up inspection intended to confirm the provider was now operating within legal requirements, but significant concerns remained and some areas the provider said had been resolved and improved were still inadequate when we returned. Governance and quality assurance systems did not provide reliable oversight and did not identify or correct risks before inspection, which contributed to people remaining at significant risk of harm. While staff records showed supervisions and appraisals were taking place and a whistleblowing policy was available, the whistleblowing guidance did not clearly explain what staff should do if their concern related to their line manager, which reduced assurance that staff could raise concerns safely and independently.

This service remains in special measures. The provider did not demonstrate that adequate improvements had been made. Therefore, the service remains rated as inadequate overall and remains in Special Measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a time-frame within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

Updated 17 March 2026

We were not able to speak with people using the service or their relatives during this inspection as people were no longer receiving care from this provider. We have therefore based our understanding of people’s experiences on the evidence available to us, including care records, complaint information and the provider’s correspondence.

Some people’s experiences appeared to be positive, and they chose to receive care and support from Jewel Home Care again following a hospital admission. We also saw evidence of the provider being flexible and open to altering the times of people’s care visits to ensure they could make medical and social appointments. Care plans considered people’s pets, and the importance they had in people’s day to day lives.

However, we found significant risks in areas such as epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, oxygen dependency and pressure area care, and records did not consistently provide clear, accurate guidance for staff to follow. This meant we could not be assured people’s needs were being met safely. This also increased the risk of people experiencing harm through deterioration not being recognised or responded to in a timely way.

We saw a complaint from a family member in relation to office staff failing to respond to the family member’s emails when trying to make arrangements for the person and their care. Another complaint related to staff being distant with the person and spending a large amount of the care visit using their mobile phone.

We also identified concerns around a lack of guidance and information to enable staff to support people’s religious and cultural needs. For example, 1 person followed the Hindu religion and staff prepared meals for them. However, their care plan did not describe whether the persons religious needs were being met. Another person had told the provider they were Christian. However, there was no other information in their care plan, and no documentation to evidence this has been considered when designing the person’s care.