- Homecare service
Three Sisters Community Care LLP
Assessment report published 28 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We carried out this assessment on 13 October 2026. 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.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. When people receive care and treatment in their own homes an application must be made to the Court of Protection for them to authorise people to be deprived of their liberty. authority. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and found people were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.
People received safe, person-centred care from staff who knew them well and supported their choices, independence and dignity. People and their relatives consistently said they felt safe and described staff as kind, patient, reliable and responsive. Staff identified changes in people’s health, including pressure damage, falls and deteriorating wellbeing, and sought support from health professionals when needed. Medicines were generally managed safely, and familiar staff used equipment such as hoists and walking aids appropriately.
People’s outcomes were positive. Staff supported people at their preferred pace, encouraged them to retain everyday skills and adapted care when needs changed. People described choosing their clothes, food, routines and activities, while relatives valued the continuity of regular care workers and the electronic care system, which provided information about visits and updates. Staff respected people’s culture, faith, communication needs and emotional wellbeing, including supporting people living with dementia, anxiety and bereavement.
The service remained rated good overall.
However, improvements were needed to make sure all required staff training was completed within expected timescales, people’s assessments and risk reviews remained up to date and that governance systems identified and addressed overdue actions. The provider responded during and following the assessment, including confirming that outstanding staff training had been completed.
People knew how to contact the service, provide feedback and raise concerns. They said managers were accessible and acted when issues were reported. People and relatives frequently described the service as family-oriented and said they would recommend it, a relative said, “It’s a relief knowing that they are both safe and being well looked after.”
People's experience of this service
We spoke by telephone with 5 people who used the service and 7 relatives of people who used the service. Their feedback was consistently positive. People said they felt safe, knew which staff were visiting and generally received care from a regular group of care workers who arrived on time and stayed for the expected duration. One person described the service as “absolutely magic”, while a relative said the care was “exemplary”.
People told us staff were kind, respectful and attentive. They said staff protected their privacy during personal care, explained what they were doing and asked for consent. People valued the time staff spent talking, listening and providing reassurance as well as completing practical tasks. One person said staff were, “Dedicated, funny and they cheer me up when I am down”; another described them as “like family”.
People told us care was tailored to people’s routines, preferences and circumstances. People described choosing what to wear, eat and do, being supported to shop or go into the garden, and being encouraged to complete parts of their own care where possible. Staff respected people’s faith, life history and communication needs, and supported emotional wellbeing through companionship, humour and reassurance. Relatives said regular staff understood what mattered to people and helped reduce anxiety.
People and relatives said staff noticed changes in health and wellbeing and took appropriate action, including contacting district nurses, GPs or emergency services and remaining with people until help arrived. Reviews led to changes such as increased call times or updated support. People found the office easy to contact and said concerns were listened to and addressed. One relative said, “Staff “know my [relative] and work with them, my [relative] is central to what they do, they listen.”