Date of assessment 26 September to 17 October 2025. Eveready Carers is a domiciliary care service providing personal care for people in their own homes. At the time of inspection, 1 person was in receipt of personal care. The provider was previously inspected in November 2023 (report published February 2024). At that time a rating was not given due to insufficient evidence. However, they were given some recommendations and told how to improve. We therefore carried out a comprehensive inspection of this service under our new methodology where we looked at all 5 key questions and all 33-quality statement. Based on the findings of this CQC assessment we have rated them requires improvement. People had care plans and risk management plans in place. However, the provider did not always ensure that care plans were up to date and contained the right information. Medicines were not always managed safely, and the provider did not follow their medicines management policy and procedures. Although no one had come to harm, the provider needed to improve in their medicine management. Staff received training, supervision and competency checks. However we found gaps in staff training, and we were not assured of the providers staff training processes. The provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor staff training and if they were in date. Recruitment was safe, and staffing levels were appropriate. The service worked with external professionals and supported people to have choice and control over their lives. We also had concerns with the provider’s governance processes as some audits processes were not robust such as medicines audit which appeared to be a tick box exercise. The registered manager was otherwise clear about most responsibilities and promoted a positive, person-centred culture. There was a lack of clarity from the registered manager around the circumstances in which safeguarding notifications should be sent to CQC and their general legal obligation as a registered person delivering a regulated activity. The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to how medicines were managed and governance processes. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run .
safe:Insufficient evidence to rateeffective:Insufficient evidence to ratecaring:Insufficient evidence to rateresponsive:Insufficient evidence to ratewell-led:Insufficient evidence to rate
Eveready Carers received 'Insufficient evidence to rate' across all five key questions on its first inspection, prompted by a notifiable incident involving the death of a service user. The principal failure was the provider's non-compliance with CQC safeguarding notification requirements, alongside minor inaccuracies in care plans, though broader care practice was largely positive.
Concerns (3)
criticalSafeguarding: “the provider was not clear about the circumstances in which they were required to notify CQC of safeguarding incidents. As a result, the provider failed to report a safeguarding concern.”
moderateGovernance: “he was not clear about the circumstances in which they should notify the CQC about safeguarding concerns.”
minorCare planning: “we saw there were minor errors in two support plans as they included directions for staff to take actions where these were no longer required.”
Strengths
· Comprehensive risk assessments covering health conditions and physical environments, with clear mitigation actions for staff.
· Staff received regular supervision every three months, appraisals every six months, and unannounced spot checks.
· Safe recruitment processes and sufficient staffing levels confirmed by rota review and staff feedback.
· Medicines administration records (MAR charts) were legible and accurately maintained; staff competency in medicines was checked.
· Positive, open culture reported by staff and relatives, with prompt management responses to concerns raised.
Quality-Statement breakdown (24)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuse and avoidable harmNot rated
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementNot rated
safe: Staffing and recruitmentNot rated
safe: Using medicines safelyNot 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 experience
Not 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: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and control and to meet their needs and preferencesNot rated
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsNot rated
responsive: Supporting people to develop and maintain relationships to avoid social isolationNot rated
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsNot rated
responsive: End of life care and supportNot rated
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourNot rated
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsNot rated
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringNot rated
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staff; Continuous learning and improving careNot rated
well-led: Working in partnership with othersNot rated