- Homecare service
Eureka Care Services Limited
Assessment report published 13 May 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 28 January 2026 to 12 March 2026. Eureka Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care to people in their own homes. This service supports older and younger people living with dementia, physical disabilities, sensory impairments and learning disability and / or autistic people. At the time of our inspection, people were receiving support with personal care. The service is also registered to operate a supported living service providing support to people with a learning disability and autistic people. No person was receiving personal care within a supported living setting at this time.
The assessment was prompted because of the length of time since our last inspection in March 2020 and due to safety concerns received from the local authority.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence, and good access to local communities which most people take for granted. We found people did not consistently receive care and support in accordance with the principles of this guidance.
People were not kept safe from harm as the systems and processes to keep them safe were not in place. Lessons learned from incidents were not embedded to keep people safe as incidents were not always reported. The provider failed to ensure people were supported by suitably qualified and competent managers and care staff. Staff had not completed appropriate training to safely support people with their known needs. Staff then lacked support and guidance from the registered manager who lacked understanding of their role and had not maintained their own professional development.
People had experienced early care visits or late visits. This was due to a lack of effective recruitment and planning. On occasions where two staff were required to provide care, one trained and one untrained staff member attended. This placed people at risk of harm from unsafe care. There were no missed visits and overall punctuality improved during this assessment.
People’s care records were not completed when needs were identified and those that were in place were not kept up to date. Those records that were in place contained limited information to instruct staff how to provide care appropriately and consistently. Risks in relation to specific health needs such as skin integrity, people living with dementia, end of life and risks of choking were not assessed to guide staff how to safely support people.
The provider was not found to be working in accordance with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and did not know how to assess and support people who may lack capacity. Consent to care for those people who had the capacity to decide were signed by others, who did not have the authority to do so.
The provider failed to identify shortfalls in people’s care and experiences, as there was inadequate oversight of the service to identify and make improvements.
Staff did not always follow good standards of hygiene when providing care to people and not all had attended infection prevention training.
Leadership was ineffective and governance arrangements were not embedded. Systems to monitor quality, manage risks, or drive improvement were either absent or not followed. Engagement with staff, external partners, and the wider community was limited, and learning from incidents or previous inspections was not demonstrated.
The service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives said some strong bonds had been made between particular care staff and them and they said staff were trying to provide the best care in difficult circumstances.
People did not have complete assessments of their care needs, which meant the provider could not always demonstrate people’s needs were consistently responded to or care was always delivered in line with people’s wishes or changing needs.
People did not receive their visits at the times agreed. One relative said, “Half the carers don’t drive, they are trying to meet a schedule that is hard for them. They turn up late; don’t spend the time they are supposed to here to get to the next job.”
People had not all experienced a service that placed safety at the core of the care provided. People were not involved in reviewing incidents that occurred to support a transparent and reflective service that was focused on improvement.
People and relatives spoken with were not all complimentary of the management team. People and relatives spoke about delays in responses to concerns or changing needs, or a lack of communication.
Although people were happy with the service, during this assessment we found significant shortfalls that did not meet expected standards and put people at risk of harm.