You are here

Archived: LIVE IN CARE4U LTD Inadequate

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 1 May 2020

About the service

Live in Care 4 U Ltd is a care at home service that provides live-in care staff for people living in their own homes. The provider is based in Rudgwick, West Sussex and people receiving care at home services were based in other areas of the country. At the time of the inspection there were two older people using the service, one of whom was living with dementia and another who experienced difficulties with their cognition.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

There were wide spread and significant concerns about the lack of oversight and regard for people’s care. Risks to people’s safety had not been identified, assessed or managed effectively and lessons had not always been learned. This included, falls management, hydration and nutrition, medicines management, safeguarding adults at risk and environmental risks. People were not always protected from the risk of abuse and improper treatment. Following the inspection, we made a safeguarding referral to the local authority about one person’s care.

There was insufficient oversight and systems and processes were not operated effectively to provide assurances of staff’s practice or the care people were receiving. Quality assurance processes were not used to monitor people’s day-to-day care to ensure they were receiving safe care and treatment. The registered manager had failed to continually improve the service. People and relatives had not been asked for their feedback about the service they received. Policies and procedures were not implemented in practice.

Staff had not been supported to undertake robust and thorough inductions and had not received training before providing live-in care and support to vulnerable people who lived alone. Staff’s competence had not been assessed and the registered manager had not always observed staff supporting people to assure themselves staff had appropriate skills and abilities. People’s needs had not always been identified or assessed. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

One person did not always receive dignified care that respected their rights. Staff were provided with insufficient guidance to inform their practice and ensure people received support that met their needs. People had not been supported to plan for care at the end of their lives.

We recommended the registered manager sought advice and guidance from a reputable source to ensure there were effective systems to assess, plan and meet people’s needs.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Relatives told us they had confidence in staff’s skills. Staff worked in partnership with external healthcare professionals to support people to maintain their health or seek assistance if they were unwell. Infection prevention and control was maintained.

Relatives praised staff’s caring approach and attentiveness. People were supported with their social needs and had access to the local community as well as pass times they enjoyed.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this home was Good (Published 9 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.


We have identified seven breaches in relation to oversight of risks and safety, risk of abuse and avoidable harm, dignity and respect, consent, staff skills and competence, failure to notify CQC of incidents and the leadership and management of the service. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Special Measures

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within six months to ch

Inspection areas



Updated 1 May 2020

The service was not safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 1 May 2020

The service was not effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 May 2020

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 1 May 2020

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 1 May 2020

The service was not well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.