- Homecare service
Solution Care 247 Northamptonshire
Assessment report published 3 December 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 26 September to 20 October 2025
The service is a care at home service providing support to adults of all ages and children aged 13-18 who are autistic, have a learning disability, are living with dementia, or mental health conditions or physical disabilities.
This assessment was carried out to ensure compliance with previous enforcement action taken against the service for breaches of regulation in relation to consent, safety and managerial oversight of the service. This was a focussed assessment and we assessed a total of 12 quality statements. 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 that most people take for granted. We found the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.
At the time of our assessment there were 3 people receiving a regulated activity from the service. As part of our assessment activity, we undertook an on-site visit on 26 September 2025.
This assessment was carried out by 1 inspector.
During this assessment we spoke with 1 person and 2 person’s relatives who advocate on their behalf. We also spoke with 3 staff members including the registered manager, deputy manager and a consultant commissioned by the service. We received feedback from 10 support workers.
At our last assessment the service was rated requires improvement. At this assessment we found the service was good.
Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored for trends and patterns. Information about people and their needs was available for sharing in an emergency to ensure a smooth transition between services. Risks to people were assessed and mitigated, however, we found some people’s risk assessments contained some general information that wasn’t applicable to them. The provider ensured the environment was assessed and risks mitigated, staff had detailed information on what to do in an emergency. For example, where to find the gas mains isolator. People were not receiving support with medicines at the time of the assessment; however, staff were occasionally supporting with over the counter medicines with no risk assessment or guidance in place. This was actioned during the assessment.
People’s needs were assessed and care planned to ensure their needs were met. Good practice tools were used to assess risks levels for people. People were independent with their health care needs, staff required further training to ensure they were competent to manage future more complex health needs for a person. Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place where needed. Staff had a good understanding of consent.
The provider had made improvements, however, some areas required further development and embedding into practice. The provider had commissioned a consultant to support them. Staff told us they felt involved in learning and improving the service.
People's experience of this service
People spoke positively and kindly of the staff and management team. People told us they were involved in managing risk and planning their care and positive risk taking was well supported and people were receiving care how they wanted it. People felt safe with staff and felt they were well trained. A relative told us, “I think they are well trained, they won’t complete a task they have not been trained in or extra tasks that they aren’t allowed to do”. People told us that care plans and records were available in the home and for sharing with emergency services if required. People felt listened to when they raised concerns and action was taken to get things right. Staff sought consent before delivering care and people were treated with dignity and respect. People had built good relationships with staff, a relative said “We have got to know them well and we can have a laugh with them”. One relative felt that a better introduction to new staff would be helpful, to allow time for getting to know them and their skill mix.