- Homecare service
Head Office Also known as Futures care
Assessment report published 6 August 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 30 April 2026 to 22 June 2026. Head Office is a supported living service providing care to people with physical disabilities, learning disabilities and/or autistic people in their own homes. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care, such as help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment 39 people were being supported with a regulated activity personal care. People lived in single properties with staff support or in shared properties.
The provider was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding and good governance.
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. We found the service demonstrated understanding of the guidance but did not always apply it.
People were not always protected from abuse and improper treatment. People were subject to control which was not a proportionate response to the risk of harm posed to them. The provider had not adequately assessed the risk of harm to people and disregarded the needs of people for care or treatment. We found people did not have assessments in place showing the level of control they were subjected to was in their best interest. We found some people who made unwise decisions had not been referred to specialist services to enable a joined-up approach.
People were offered enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. However, staff did not consistently seek advice from other agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and to support seamless transitions when moving between services. While there were some good examples of support with transitions and some people experienced a high level of support, this was not the standard for all individuals. Staff monitored people’s health to support healthy living; however, this was not always consistently documented, and concerns were not always raised in a timely manner to the right professionals. While staff made sure people with capacity understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent, staff did not always involve those important to people, when making decisions in people’s best interests, and staff had not always documented the least restrictive options available to people were considered.
Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and their privacy and dignity were protected. Staff treated people as individuals and supported people’s preferences. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. However, we found some people lacked choice in their activities and had a rigid activity schedule which was not backed up by a robust care plan or assessment. Systems and processes were not always in place to identify concerns and drive improvements. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment
People's experience of this service
Most relatives we spoke with were positive about the care their family member received and told us they felt they were safe and well cared for. Relatives praised the management team and staff for their warm, kind and welcoming manner when contacting or visiting the service.
Staff knew how to communicate with people effectively and could responded quickly to people’s verbal and non-verbal cues. Staff knew when people were distressed and were aware of strategies to meet their needs and address their anxieties, although these strategies were not always documented. Staff supported people to maintain contact with friends and family, and relatives confirmed they were usually involved in care reviews. People we spoke with told us they liked living at their homes and they were happy with the provider.