Date of Assessment:10 December 2025 to 7 January 2026. This assessment was carried out remotely. May’s Homecare Ltd is a domiciliary care service. It provides support and personal care to older people living in their own homes, some of whom live with dementia. At the time of our assessment there were 16 people receiving personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspect the service received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. We conducted this assessment to follow up on concerns we identified at the last inspection. These included a breach of regulation relating to governance. The last rating for this service was previously requires improvement (published 24 June 2022). At this assessment we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation. The overall rating for the service has changed to good. Managerial oversight of the service had improved since the previous inspection. Quality monitoring systems were in place to help drive improvements. Staff provided safe care to meet people’s needs, people’s care plans were regularly reviewed and updated when required. People had person-centred care plans and risk assessments that reflected their individual support needs. Staff had been recruited safely and had received training appropriate to their roles. The provider planned and delivered people’s care with them, and staff made appropriate referrals to external agencies to help ensure people were safely supported. Staff understood the importance of gaining people’s consent prior to supporting people with their care and were knowledgeable on the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff had a good understanding of the people they were supporting and respected people’s dignity. People confirmed the service was responsive to their needs and staff told us they felt supported in their roles. Relatives were kept informed and involved in aspects of people’s care where appropriate, this helped to ensure care met individual needs. The staff team was stable which supported continuity of care for people using the service and staff enjoyed working at the service. They said they were well supported by management.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run .
May's Homecare Limited improved in several areas since its previous inspection, resolving breaches in safe care, staffing oversight, consent, and person-centred care, but remains Requires Improvement overall due to a continued breach of Regulation 17 (Good Governance) relating to the absence of a formal call monitoring system and unresolved staff recruitment reference issues.
Concerns (4)
criticalGovernance: “There was still no formal monitoring system used to monitor late and missed calls. Therefore, we could not evidence if all care visits took place as agreed.”
moderateRecord keeping: “two application forms had not been adequately completed, to enable the service to determine who they should request references off.”
moderateStaffing levels: “lack of appropriate references had not been addressed. This showed a lack of oversight by the registered manager.”
moderateLeadership: “the registered manager was not able to demonstrate that she understood how to use it to monitor performance.”
Strengths
· Staff completed safeguarding training and understood their role in identifying and reporting concerns of potential abuse.
· Risk assessments related to falls, moving and handling, skin integrity, pain management, nutrition and hydration were in place.
· People confirmed the service did not miss any care calls and that staff were always on time.
· The majority of people using the service were Somalian and Somalian staff were employed, ensuring effective communication and cultural needs were met.
· Care plans were individualised and personalised, detailing clearly how the person wanted their needs and preferences met.
Quality-Statement breakdown (22)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuse; Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementRequires improvement
safe: Staffing and recruitmentRequires improvement
safe: Using medicines safelyNot rated
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
effective: Staff skills, knowledge and experienceGood
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawGood
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough with choice of a balanced diet
May's Homecare Limited received an overall rating of Requires Improvement at its first inspection, with breaches of Regulations 9, 11, 12, 17 and 18 identified across unsafe medicines management, absent risk assessments, non-compliant Mental Capacity Act practice, inadequate care planning, and ineffective governance. Caring was rated Good, reflecting positive staff relationships and dignity in care, but systemic governance failures and limited managerial oversight placed people at risk of harm.
Concerns (12)
criticalCare planning: “People's care plans were not person-centred. All care plans we viewed had similar information on people's needs and preferences. The information was also generalised and lacked details.”
criticalGovernance: “The provider did not have suitable quality assurance processes in place to ensure people received safe care. There were no quality monitoring systems in place.”
criticalMedication management: “The provider did not manage medicines as required by national guidance...did not provide staff with directions on how to apply creams for each person and how to record this support.”
criticalConsent / capacity: “The provider was not working in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act...no evidence available to show that the provider had checked that these relatives had the legal right.”
moderateSupervision / appraisal: “Staff did not receive regular supervision. In staff files, we saw one supervision record for one member of care staff.”
moderateStaff competency: “The provider could not assure us that all senior staff were suitable for tasks that were allocated to them...no evidence that they had received appropriate training and support.”
moderateRecord keeping: “Communication with external health and social care professionals was not recorded, therefore, the service could not evidence when it took place, what was discussed, or the outcome.”
moderateSafeguarding: “The provider did not monitor this. People and relatives could have the capacity to agree to this support...the lack of oversight from the service could lead to a potential risk of financial abuse.”
moderateMissed or late visits: “There was no monitoring system used to monitor late and missed calls. Therefore, we could not say if all care visits took place as agreed.”
moderateLeadership: “The recently recruited registered manager was employed for approximately six hours a week...availability of the nominated individual was limited due to other commitments.”
moderateInfection control: “May's Home Care managers did not monitor this to ensure all staff undertook this test or to record the results, as required by the national guidelines.”
minorStaff training: “The registered manager had limited knowledge of their obligation under the duty of candour.”
Strengths
· Relatives spoke positively about the care provided and thought the care staff were kind and caring.
· The same care staff supported people consistently, helping develop positive relationships and continuity of care.
· Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and had received safeguarding training.
· PPE was used effectively and safely; infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
· People were supported with community activities, cultural interests and religious events.
Quality-Statement breakdown (22)
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and management; Using medicines safelyRequires improvement
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentRequires improvement
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionRequires improvement
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceRequires improvement
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawRequires improvement
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet
Good
effective: Staff working with other agencies to provide consistent, effective, timely careGood
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceGood
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; equality and diversityGood
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their careGood
caring: Respecting and promoting people's privacy, dignity and independenceGood
responsive: Planning personalised care to meet people's needs, preferences, interests and give them choice and controlGood
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsGood
responsive: Supporting people to develop and maintain relationships to avoid social isolationGood
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsGood
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 requirementsRequires improvement
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candour; Continuous learning and improving careGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staff, fully considering their equality characteristicsGood
well-led: Working in partnership with othersGood
Good
effective: Staff working with other agencies to provide consistent, effective, timely careRequires improvement
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceRequires improvement
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversityGood
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their careGood
caring: Respecting and promoting people's privacy, dignity and independenceGood
responsive: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and control and to meet their needs and preferencesRequires improvement
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsRequires improvement
responsive: Supporting people to develop and maintain relationships to avoid social isolationGood
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsGood
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 requirementsRequires improvement
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourRequires improvement
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringGood
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careGood