You are here

Raza Homecare Limited Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 12 September 2019

About the service: Raza Homecare Limited is a domiciliary care agency and registered for ‘personal care’. The service provides personal care to older people who may be living with dementia and have physical disabilities. At the time of inspection, 11 out of 13 adults were receiving support with personal care from this 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.

People’s experience of using this service:

People’s risk management plans lacked information regarding the potential risks to people to help staff determine and mitigate the impact of these risks. This was a breach of regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Quality assurance processes in place were not sufficient enough to monitor the service delivery. This was a breach of regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Staff were not always supported to update their knowledge and skills in all areas required for their role. We have made a recommendation about this.

Although interview notes were not available to view, records showed that staff were required to undertake pre-employment checks before they started working with people. People’s care plans were not always person-centred to guide staff on how people wanted to be supported. The management team told us that these areas of concern will be addressed immediately. We will check their progress at our next comprehensive inspection.

Staff had knowledge and skills to support people from potential harm and abuse. People received their medicines in line with their prescriptions. Systems were in place to ensure hygienic care for people. Any incidents and accidents taking place were recorded and monitored to ensure safe care delivery.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People had support to attend their health appointments when needed. Staff assisted people with their meal preparations as necessary.

People felt that staff attended to their needs with care and compassion and were respectful towards their privacy. Staff supported people in the decision-making process. Personal information about people was kept safely.

People had the necessary assistance to meet their health and communication needs. Any concerns people had were discussed and addressed by the staff team in good time. Policies and procedures were in place to guide staff on how to support people at the end of life stages should the service received a referral.

The management team was involved in the service delivery and shared responsibilities to ensure good care for people. People and their relatives provided feedback on how they valued the service. Staff had support on the job to ensure they performed their duties well.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection- The overall rating for the service has changed from good to requires improvement. The last rating for this service was good (published 31 March 2017).

Why we inspected- This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up- You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 12 September 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.



Updated 12 September 2019

The service was effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 12 September 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.



Updated 12 September 2019

The service was responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 12 September 2019

The service was not always well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.