- Homecare service
Wisteria Care
We served a warning notice on Mr & Mrs S Wortley on 24 April 2026 for failing to meet the regulations related to safe care and treatment and safe management of medicines at Wisteria Care.
Assessment report published 19 May 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 10 February 2026 to 10 April 2026.
Wisteria Care provides care and support to people living in their own homes. The service provides support to older people living with dementia, physical disabilities or sensory impairments, people with a learning disability and autistic people.
Not everyone received a regulated activity. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’ which is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.
At the time of the assessment there were 89 people using the service.
This assessment was carried out due to concerns we had received about the service. At our last inspection the service was rated good, at this assessment the service has been rated requires improvement.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability.
Care plans and risk assessments did not always detail all the required information and risks had not always been assessed. This placed people at risk of harm.
Medicines were not always managed safely. Where people lacked the capacity to make specific decisions, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was not always followed.
There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, however some staff told us they were rushed and travel time was not factored into their runs. The registered manager was addressing this. Some staffs understanding of safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures varied, most knew about reporting concerns to external agencies. The registered manager had taken steps to reinforce safeguarding and whistleblowing information.
We received mixed feedback from staff regarding the training, and the registered manager was arranging additional training for staff. The governance systems were not fully effective and had not identified the concerns we found during this assessment. The registered manager completed checks and audits, but these had not been effective in monitoring quality or driving improvement. The registered manager was responsive to our feedback.
We found breaches of regulations relating to safe care and treatment, need for consent and good governance. The provider took some immediate action during the assessment; however, governance systems were not robust enough to provide ongoing assurance.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff told us how they promoted choice and person-centred care. People and relatives were involved in decisions about their care. People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care; professionals gave mixed feedback about the service. Most staff felt supported and felt they were treated equally.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to some of the concerns found at this assessment. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and or appeals have been concluded.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives were generally positive about their experience of receiving care from Wisteria Care. Many people told us they felt safe and described staff as kind, respectful and caring. People spoke positively about the way staff treated them, with several highlighting good relationships and friendly interactions during visits. One person told us, “I think the personality of the carers are spot on”, while another said, “There is nothing negative about the service.” Relatives echoed this, describing staff as compassionate and trustworthy, with comments such as, “They are absolutely kind and caring, very respectful always.”
People told us staff usually arrived on time and stayed for the expected duration of visits. We received some mixed feedback relating to staff being rushed, although most people didn’t think this. One person said, “They never rush me or rush to get away.” Another person commented, “They are rushing in and rushing out all the time.”
People described having a laugh and a joke with staff, which contributed to a relaxed and positive atmosphere.
People and relatives told us staff promoted independence and choice. Several people described being encouraged to do what they could for themselves, particularly with personal care and daily tasks. One relative told us how staff supported their family member to remain independent and involved in their care. People also said they were offered choices about how their care was delivered and felt listened to when expressing preferences.
Most people felt able to raise concerns if needed and knew how to contact the office. Relatives told us concerns were usually responded to, although some raised issues about communication and visit times. A small number of people and relatives described inconsistencies in visit times or changes to carers, which they told us could be frustrating. One person told us, “The rota can keep changing sadly which can be erratic”, and another said, “Visit times can be hit and miss.”
Overall, people experienced a caring service where staff were described as friendly, respectful and compassionate. While there were some concerns about consistency and communication, many people and relatives said they would recommend the service to others.