- Homecare service
Compassion Care Limited
We served a warning notice on Compassion Care Limited on 1 October 2026 for failing to meet the regulation related to good governance at Compassion Care Limited.
Assessment report published 28 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 28 to 30 September 2026. Compassion Care is registered as a domiciliary care agency providing the regulated activity 'personal care' to people who live in their own home. The service provides support to adults of all ages, including people living with dementia. At the time of the assessment, 35 people were using the service, of whom 25 were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.
The assessment was undertaken due to the length of time since the previous assessment. This was an off-site assessment, which meant all requested records were submitted electronically and reviewed remotely. The provider was given 72 hours' notice of the assessment to ensure management staff were available to support the process and provide the information requested.
The service was not consistently well-led. There was not a registered manager in post at the time of this assessment, there was an acting manager in post who had started June 2026. There were significant concerns regarding the safety, effectiveness and governance of the service. Medicines were not always managed safely, care plans and risk assessments were not always accurate, complete or regularly reviewed, and the provider could not always demonstrate that people's needs were assessed and managed using evidence-based practice. Where people were deemed to lack capacity, the provider had not always followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Governance systems were not effective in identifying and addressing concerns in a timely way. Audits had not consistently identified areas requiring improvement, there was no effective system for capturing and sharing lessons learned, and the provider could not always demonstrate that incidents, accidents, complaints and safeguarding concerns were appropriately recorded, monitored or analysed. Records did not always contain accurate and up-to-date information, which could impact the safe delivery of care and the sharing of information with other professionals when required. Staff also raised concerns about leadership, support and fairness within the organisation.
The acting manager had introduced initiatives to support staff wellbeing. Staff were committed to providing good quality care and there were examples of positive partnership working. However, systems and processes were not yet sufficiently embedded to ensure consistent oversight, safe care and continuous improvement across the service.
Staff knew people well and people told us they were supported by kind, caring and compassionate staff who treated them with dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and were generally supported to maintain their independence, choice and control.
Overall, we found people were supported by caring staff, but improvements were needed to ensure safe, effective and well-led care, with stronger governance arrangements, better record keeping, clearer risk management and greater assurance that people consistently received care that met their needs.
The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to safe care and treatment, consent to care and good governance. 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.
People's experience of this service
People and their relatives spoke positively about the service and told us they felt safe and well supported by staff. One relative described how staff responded appropriately when their family member had a fall, saying, “My [family member] is very safe and well cared for. A carer was with him when they fell, supported him, kept him comfortable and called 999. I wouldn’t have known what to do.” Another relative told us, “[family member] is safe,” and explained that staff kept them informed when their family member was unwell.
People and relatives were generally positive about the reliability of care visits. They told us staff usually arrived on time and stayed for the full length of their calls. Comments included, “I can’t fault them [staff]. They come on time and stay for the full length of the visit,” and “There has never been a time when staff have not attended.” Relatives also told us they could monitor visit times through the provider’s electronic system and confirmed staff stayed for the required duration. One person commented that while they received the weekly rota, they would prefer to receive it earlier in the week.
People told us staff followed infection prevention and control practices and treated their homes with respect. One relative said, “The staff take their shoes off and wear gloves and aprons.”
People and relatives consistently described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Comments included, “The staff are very kind and caring,” “The staff really do care,” and, “Very kind and respectful care.” Relatives told us staff knew people well, understood their family members likes and preferences, and addressed them by their preferred names. One relative said, “They know my [family member] well and know his likes and preferences.”
Some people told us they had been involved in the initial assessment and care planning process. One relative explained they had an hour-long meeting before care started, where information was gathered and there was “no pressure.” They also told us they had received a paper copy of the care plan and those requested changes had been made. However, other relatives told us they had not been involved in reviewing care plans since the service started, although they remained satisfied with the care provided.
People and relatives knew how to raise concerns and said they would contact the office if needed. Whilst no one we spoke with had recently made a complaint, one relative told us it could sometimes be difficult to get through to the office by telephone, and they did not always receive a call back after leaving a message.
Relatives told us staff went above and beyond to support people and promote their wellbeing. One relative said, “[family member] has been bedbound and has not developed any pressure sores. She has received the right care and that is down to the staff.” Another told us, “They are very good and kind, clean up after themselves and always ask if there is anything else they can do. I would recommend them to anyone.”