- Homecare service
A & L Enablement Services (Care & Support) Limited
Assessment report published 30 September 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
AL Enablement Services (Care Support) Limited is registered to provide domiciliary services to people living in their own homes in the community. There were 57 people using the service at the time of the assessment of which 28 were receiving a regulated activity.
AL Enablement Services (Care Support) Limited is registered to provide domiciliary care services to older people, younger adults, dementia, mental health, sensory impairment and physical disability.
We carried out this assessment on 9 September to 23 September. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
The inspection found that people received safe, person-centred care from a caring and committed staff team. People and their relatives consistently told us they felt safe, valued the continuity of care provided, and were positive about the reliability, communication and responsiveness of the service. Staff were described as kind, compassionate and knowledgeable, and people felt involved in decisions about their care. Care plans and risk assessments were detailed and personalised, providing staff with clear guidance to meet people's individual needs, preferences, cultural requirements and communication needs. Evidence demonstrated that people received care in line with their assessed needs, with flexibility provided when circumstances changed.
People were supported by enough staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them safely. Risks were assessed and people were involved in the process. There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were administered safely and there were systems in place to ensure the environment was safe.
There was evidence of effective recruitment processes, good oversight of incidents and accidents, and positive partnership working with families and healthcare professionals. Staff spoke positively about the support they received from management and described a culture focused on delivering high-quality care and achieving positive outcomes for people. Relatives and staff consistently described management as visible, approachable and responsive, with senior leaders providing support and guidance to the registered manager.
People received care that was flexible and responsive to changes in their needs, including following hospital admissions and periods of increased support. However, some governance arrangements required further strengthening to ensure sustained oversight and continuous improvement. Areas identified included implementing more robust systems to monitor safeguarding notifications, strengthening oversight of staff supervision and appraisal processes, increasing opportunities for staff engagement through regular meetings, formalising the recording of lessons learned, and developing clearer systems to record and review complaints, compliments and comments. In addition, some anomalies identified within electronic call monitoring records required further review to ensure they accurately reflected care delivery. During the assessment, we made the registered manager aware of their responsibility to notify CQC of notifiable incidents and safeguarding events in line with regulatory requirements, as not all safeguarding referrals had been submitted to CQC. The provider had already developed an action plan to address the areas identified during the assessment and demonstrated an understanding of the improvements required.
The provider had a recent change in ownership, this provided further assurances regarding the sustainability of the service, with the new owners committing investment to support governance, operational development and service improvements. This investment, alongside the provider's proactive response to the findings of this assessment, provides a positive foundation for continued improvement and the maintenance of good outcomes for people using the service.
People's experience of this service
Feedback from people and their relatives was positive about the care and support provided. People consistently told us they felt safe when receiving care and described staff as professional, reliable and trustworthy. One relative said, “I trust the carers... they are excellent, very professional," whilst another relative commented, “I trust them completely." People also told us concerns were acted upon promptly, with examples of staff who were not suited to a person's needs being removed from care packages following feedback.
People and relatives were complimentary about the kindness, compassion and dignity shown by staff. Comments included, “The carers were incredible... they treated [person] with dignity and respect and kept them immaculate," and “They are fabulous. All of them. They laugh and joke and are so kind and caring." Several relatives described long-standing relationships between care staff and their loved ones, with one telling us, “[Name] always looks forward to their visits," and another saying the carers were, “A god send." Relatives also valued how staff had successfully encouraged people to accept care and support that family members had struggled to provide.
People felt staff understood their individual needs and delivered person-centred care. Relatives described carers as knowledgeable, skilled and attentive, particularly when supporting people living with dementia and complex health needs. One relative told us, “The carers totally work towards what is best" [for their family member]. They adapted their approach to make care more comfortable. People also spoke positively about continuity of care, with regular teams of carers getting to know them well and understanding their preferences and routines.
People and relatives told us the service was responsive when needs changed and communication was good. Examples included reassessments following hospital admissions, increased support after injuries, and flexible arrangements to support hospital appointments. One relative said the service was “Really good at adapting the care they provide." Another relative described the support as “Outstanding." People felt able to raise concerns and were confident management would respond appropriately. One relative commented, “I’ve complained twice and it has always been dealt with swiftly and appropriately. That is why I've stuck with them so long."
People generally had confidence in the management of the service and told us communication with the office was responsive and supportive. Several relatives said they would recommend the service to others, with comments such as, “I have already recommended this company to at least three other people." Another relative said, “I would recommend them very highly." However, one relative told us they had not been informed about a recent change in company ownership and felt communication regarding significant organisational changes could be improved.