You are here

Head Office (Omega Homes Ltd) Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 1 June 2019

About the service:

Head Office (Omega Homes) is a domiciliary care agency and supported living service. It provides personal care to younger adults with learning disabilities, and physical disabilities living in their own houses which were supported living environments. People needed help with day-to-day tasks like cooking, shopping, washing and dressing and help to maintain their health and wellbeing. People had a variety of complex needs including mental and physical health needs.

Head Office (Omega Homes) provides care and support to people living in two ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

The service had two supported living properties in the Longfield and Gravesend area of Kent. In these premises people each had their own bedrooms, but shared the kitchen, dining room, lounge, laundry and the garden. There was an office at each site.

Not everyone using Head Office (Omega Homes) receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. The service was providing personal care to six people diagnosed with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorder at the time of the inspection.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence.

People’s experience of using this service:

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; staff recognised that people had the capacity to make day to day choices and supported them to do so. People were encouraged to be independent. People were engaging in the community.

Risks to people’s safety had not always been identified. Risk assessments did not have all the information staff needed to keep people safe. The provider had not always reported and arranged repairs with the landlord and maintenance had not always been undertaken in a timely manner.

Medicines were not always managed safely. Medicine administration records (MARS) were not always complete and accurate and did not always show that people received their medicines as prescribed. Where people had ‘as and when’ medicine such as pain relief there was information for staff such as how often the medicines could be taken and when it may be needed. Medicines were stored safely.

People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice. Some people’s care files showed consent forms which relatives had signed. There were no capacity assessments in place to evidence that the person had been asked about the decision. There were no records that best interest meetings had taken place with relevant people to discuss what would be in people’s best interests.

The provider had not always made adequate records when recruiting staff to demonstrate that they had carried out thorough pre-employment checks. This is an area for improvement. There were suitable numbers of staff on shift to meet people’s needs.

Accidents and incidents had appropriately been recorded and reported and actions had been taken. The accident and incident forms had not always been updated by a member of the management te

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 1 June 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 June 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 1 June 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 June 2019

The service was not always responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 June 2019

The service was not always well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.