You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 21 February 2020

Lone Care Services Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 27 people at the time of the inspection. 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 and what we found

Staff were aware of the risks to people’s safety and produced management plans to reduce the risks to their health and welfare. If staff had concerns about a person’s safety this was communicated with the management team who liaised with the appropriate health and/or social care professional. Including liaising with the local authority safeguarding adults’ team where required. Where people required support, staff adhered to safe medicines management practices. Staff followed infection control procedures. Where incidents occurred these were learnt from and additional practices were put in place to reduce the risk of recurrence. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs.

People received care from skilled and knowledgeable staff who received regular training. Staff assessed people’s needs in line with best practice guidance and information from referring agencies. Where people required it, staff supported people with meals and to access healthcare services. Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and supported people in line with the principles of the Act. 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 were complimentary about the care workers that supported them. They had built good working relationships with them and found their care workers to be polite and friendly. We heard there were some inconsistencies in which care worker supported a person, but the management team were working on improving this. Staff took account of people’s individual differences and supported them in line with their wishes, their religion, cultural background and sexuality. People respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported them to be as independent as possible.

People received support in line with their care and support plans. These plans identified what level of support people required and how they wished to be supported. Information was made accessible to people about the service and people confirmed accurate records were maintained about the support provided. A complaints policy was in place and any complaints received were handled in line with this policy.

The management team regularly reviewed the quality of service provision and asked for feedback from people and their relatives about care delivery. There were regular staff meetings and processes to acknowledge and thank staff for their hard work. Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities, this included in relation to the duty of candour and the registered manager’s CQC registration. The registered manager and director focused on continuous improvement and kept up to date with best practice guidance.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good. (Published 18 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas



Updated 21 February 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 21 February 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 21 February 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 21 February 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 21 February 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.