Loading
This assessment commenced on 28 April 2025 and was completed on 6 May 2025. Privilege Homecare is a domiciliary care service that provides care and support for people in their own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. At the time of our assessment the service was supporting 2 people with the regulated activity of personal care. This assessment was carried out using remote technology and we did not visit the location’s office. We spoke with people, relatives, staff and the provider. We reviewed 12 quality statements. The overall rating following this assessment is good. Processes were in place to protect people from abuse. However, the person with responsibility for overseeing safeguarding had not completed any recent training which meant there was a risk abuse may go undetected and unreported. Staff knew people well and had a good understanding of how to safely manage individual risks. Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people received good outcomes. The provider did not always ensure all the actions staff were taking and advice from partners were recorded within people’s care records. People received consistent care from staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff did not have any days off and we were concerned this may impact on the quality and safety of care. All staff had worked at the service for many years and were subject to regular checks to ensure they continued to be safe to work with vulnerable people. The culture and values of the service focused on inclusivity, respect, openness and treating people as individuals. Staff lived these values and ensured they were reflected in the care they provided to people. Staff spoke positively about the provider and said they provided effective support and promoted an open and inclusive culture. The provider had not undertaken any training for several years. This meant there was a risk the quality of their audits and oversight of the service was not in line with current practice. Governance systems had been improved since our last assessment. However, further improvements were required to some audit processes to ensure they consistently identified and addressed shortfalls. The provider was receptive to feedback and took a number of actions during the assessment to address areas for improvement.
npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-115026066.