• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Aspire Hub 2

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Holmsley Lane, Woodlesford, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS26 8RY 07891 277031

Provided and run by:
Aspire Community Benefit Society Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Assessment report published 14 August 2026

On this page

Caring

Good

14 August 2026

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Kindness, compassion and dignity

Score: 3

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Throughout the assessment we saw staff speak and engage with people in a kind, patient and supportive manner. We observed one staff member supporting a person who clearly enjoyed jokes and this was part of how staff communicated. People were treated respectfully and their dignity was respected. Staff demonstrated compassion not only when speaking with people but also when they spoke to the inspection team about people, focussing on people’s strengths and qualities.

The team were courteous and welcoming to the inspection team and engaged with each other in an open and friendly manner. One staff member said, “We all try our best to support each other to give people a good life, they people who live here are what’s important.”

Treating people as individuals

Score: 3

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure the care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of the persons strengths, abilities, aspirations, unique background and protected characteristics.

Staff supported people to communicate using their preferred communication methods, enabling them to express their choices, wishes, and preferences effectively. These were clearly documented in support plans and were well understood by the regular staff team, including agency staff who worked regularly within the service. However, relatives told us that when unfamiliar agency or non-regular staff were supporting people, there were occasional gaps in knowledge about individuals’ needs and preferences, which had the potential to impact the consistency and quality of support provided.

People’s goals, aspirations, preferences, life histories, and experiences were well understood and recorded in personalised support plans. This information guided staff to provide support in a way that reflected each person’s individual needs, choices, and identity, rather than focusing solely on their care requirements. People were encouraged and supported to be themselves, and we observed that their homes reflected their personalities, interests, and hobbies through personal belongings and items of significance to them.

Independence, choice and control

Score: 3

The provider promoted the people’s independence rights and choice. To ensure they had control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People’s choices and preferences were clearly documented, and their independence was promoted. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the importance of supporting people to make their own decisions, including decisions that may be considered unwise. One staff member explained, “People are allowed to make unwise decisions. You would look at it from the point of view of person-centred care and safeguarding. I would point out the positives and negatives and make sure they were fully informed.”

This approach supported people to exercise choice and maintain control over their lives, enabling them to make informed decisions about their care and support wherever possible.

Responding to people’s immediate needs

Score: 3

The provider listened to and understood the people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to the people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We reviewed documentation that demonstrated how staff supported people to receive the care and assistance they needed at the time it was required. Support plans contained detailed, person-centred guidance on how to respond when individuals experienced distress, including early warning signs that may indicate a concern. This enabled staff to intervene promptly and take appropriate action to minimise distress and promote wellbeing.

During our observations, interactions between staff and people were consistently caring, compassionate, and respectful. Staff knew people well and demonstrated a strong understanding of their needs and preferences, which enabled them to anticipate concerns and respond quickly and effectively. This contributed to people receiving timely, personalised support that reflected their individual circumstances.

Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Score: 2

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

The provider had policies and processes in place to support staff wellbeing, including a flexible working policy designed to help staff maintain a healthy work-life balance. Staff also had access to an employee assistance programme, providing additional support when needed.

 

Feedback from staff regarding support from the management team was mixed. Some staff told us they felt well supported and valued by managers. However, others described increased pressures associated with the ongoing shortage of permanent staff, stating that they were often required to take on additional responsibilities to ensure people's needs continued to be met and service requirements were maintained.

Staff told us they felt able to approach managers, raise concerns, and discuss issues affecting the service. However, several staff expressed concern that the continued reliance on a limited number of permanent staff was having a negative impact on their wellbeing, workload, and morale. They felt that addressing recruitment and retention challenges was essential to reducing pressure on the existing workforce and improving staff wellbeing.