Allot Healthcare Services York

Updated 29 July 2026

Date of Assessment: 13, 17 and 19 August 2026.

Allot Healthcare Services York is registered to deliver both domiciliary care and a supported living service. We were not assured the supported living service aspect was being actively delivered at the time of the assessment. Therefore, findings in this report relate to the domiciliary care service only.

Significant concerns were identified regarding the provider’s ability to assure themselves people consistently received safe, effective and well-coordinated care. The service had experienced prolonged difficulties accessing its electronic human resources and care management systems and was in the process of transferring information to a new system. As a result, records were fragmented across electronic and paper systems and inspectors experienced considerable difficulty obtaining information requested during the inspection.

Leaders were unable to readily demonstrate effective oversight of care, staffing and governance arrangements. Records relating to incidents, safeguarding concerns, medicines, pressure care, seizures, repositioning and other areas of risk were incomplete, disorganised or had not been consistently reviewed and followed up. We found examples where concerns relating to wounds, skin integrity, seizures and medicines had been recorded but were not reflected within incident management or governance systems. This meant people were placed at risk of harm because leaders lacked effective oversight of incidents, risks and quality concerns, reducing their ability to identify issues promptly and take action to keep people safe.

People, relatives and staff repeatedly raised concerns about communication, continuity of care and timekeeping. Several relatives described difficulties contacting the office, receiving support from familiar carers and not being informed of changes to visits. The provider's own surveys, complaints records and audits identified similar themes, including staff lateness, inconsistent staffing and communication failures. While leaders had recognised these concerns, inspection evidence demonstrated governance arrangements remained ineffective and had not resulted in sustained improvements for people. Significant discrepancies were identified in staffing information, recruitment records and monitoring systems, reducing assurance that risks were being effectively managed.

Although care plans were often detailed, they were not always current, consistently implemented or accurately reflected in the electronic information available to staff. We could not be assured people had been involved in these or in any subsequent reviews. In addition, information in care plans was not always accurately transferred to the electronic system staff used to understand the care people needed.

Overall, weaknesses in leadership, governance, record keeping and quality assurance meant the provider could not demonstrate people consistently received safe, effective and responsive care. Leaders had identified areas requiring improvement and had plans to strengthen systems, but these changes were not sufficiently embedded at the time of the inspection.

We identified 5 breaches of regulation relating to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, staffing, fit and proper people employed, and good governance. Risks to people were not always managed safely, staff were not recruited safely or deployed effectively, care records were not consistently person centred and governance systems had failed to identify or address concerns.

In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward.

Updated 29 July 2026

People's experience of receiving care from Allot Healthcare Services York was mixed. Many people and relatives spoke positively about the kindness shown by individual care staff, when these were regular staff. People told us these staff treated them with dignity and respect and had developed positive relationships over time. Some relatives described carers as caring and dedicated, with one relative saying about their regular carers, “They are very, very good.” Other comments included, “Regular carers are very good and never an issue” and “[Name] says they are lovely girls.” However, one relative told us staff were “horrible and very abrupt in mannerism”. Another relative told us the office staff “seldom report back”, with other comments including “very seldom ring up to say they are running late” and “I have to ring them a lot, usually 5 days out of 7 every week”.

Some people and relatives described how regular carers often knew them well and understood what was important to them. One relative said,“ [Name] loves them (staff).” Another relative explained the support provided had allowed them to feel more relaxed about their relative’s care. However, one person told us, “[Staff name] totally ignores me in my own home.”

People and relatives did not always experience continuity of care. Several relatives told us they were frustrated by changes in care staff and felt unfamiliar carers did not understand their relative’s routines or preferences. Comments included, “The issues we have are not having consistency with carers”, “Never seem to get regular ones (staff) that come” and “Seems when any problems happen it is a weekend. Not quite on the ball.”

People and their relatives described never seeing care plans or being involved in reviews. One relative said, “We ask them (staff) to log [things] manually but couldn’t see it anywhere when I last visited.” Another commented, “Never get a reply.” Other comments included, “Don’t get to see these (care plans)” and “Never seen a care plan.”

Whilst some people told us they were happy with the care their regular staff provided, we found concerns in relation to person-centred care, the safe management of risks and medicines, and the effectiveness of governance systems, which placed people at risk of harm.