Date of Assessment: 20 March 2026 to 2 April 2026. The service is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to children and adults living with physical disabilities, sensory impairments, dementia, mental health conditions and learning disabilities. This assessment was completed to identify if the required improvements had been made following a previous inspection in July 2022. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’. This guidance supported judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choice, independence and access to local communities that most people take for granted. Risk assessments and care plans were in place and medicines administration systems meant people received the right support. People received their care at the right time by qualified and suitably recruited staff. People were safeguarded from abuse and there were systems in place to learn when things went wrong. People received care in their preferred way and were involved in planning their care and support with regular reviews of the process. The principles of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 were followed by staff and people were supported to have the care they needed to maintain their independence. Staff were kind and caring to people and treated them with respect whilst maintaining their dignity and privacy. The provider had systems in place to ensure the culture of the service and staff was viewed positively by people using the service. Systems in place ensured staff maintained their skills and followed policies to deliver safe and effective care and support.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-123516630.
SentriCare remained Requires Improvement for a second consecutive inspection, with a continued breach of Regulation 17 (good governance) resulting in a Warning Notice. Persistent issues included late calls, inconsistent staff, missing risk protocols (epilepsy, oxygen, creams), inaccessible care plans, and inadequate provider oversight.
Concerns (12)
criticalGovernance: “Systems and processes in place to assess and monitor the service were not consistently effective at driving and maintaining improvements.”
criticalCare planning: “Two people with a medical condition of epilepsy did not have a separate protocol in place to provide staff with information on what action to take”
moderateMissed or late visits: “feedback from people and relatives identified the issues remained around staff being late and people not being informed.”
moderateStaffing levels: “I have told them [the provider] keep the same carers but I get different carers. They change like the weather.”
moderateMedication management: “one person had not always received their medicines at a consistent time. For example, every four hours... medication had been administered between a four and six hour window.”
moderateCommunication with families: “only one of the 13 people and relatives we spoke with said they received a call to let them know when staff were running late.”
moderateComplaints handling: “I've given up phoning the office as no-one gets back to you.”
moderateCultural competency: “[Person] cannot speak or read English. There was no discussion on having a care plan in Punjabi.”
moderateIncident learning: “The records did not always show what had been put in place to mitigate reoccurrence or identify potential trends.”
moderateRecord keeping: “care records and risk assessments... still required more detail to ensure information was clear and up to date for staff to refer to.”
minorInfection control: “One staff member had been wearing their own clothes rather than their uniform and some staff had disposed of their used personal protective equipment (PPE) in people's own rubbish bins.”
minorStaff competency: “I have to explain to new carers what to do.”
Strengths
· Staff sought consent and were knowledgeable about people's support needs
· Appropriate pre-employment checks including DBS were in place
· People described staff as kind and caring; privacy and dignity were respected
· Comprehensive induction and annual training programme covering 64 modules
· Safeguarding reporting processes had improved and staff understood their duty to report
Quality-Statement breakdown (21)
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementNot rated
safe: Staffing and recruitmentNot rated
safe: Using medicines safelyNot rated
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseNot rated
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionNot rated
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongNot rated
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawNot rated
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceNot rated
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced dietNot rated
effective: Staff working with other agencies to provide consistent, effective, timely careNot rated
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceNot rated
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversityNot rated
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their careNot rated
caring: Respecting and promoting people's privacy, dignity and independenceNot rated
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsNot rated
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsNot rated
responsive: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and control and to meet their needs and preferencesNot rated
responsive: End of life care and supportNot rated
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirements; Continuous learning and improving careNot rated
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringNot rated
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourNot rated