Premium Homecare Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, and systems of accountability. However, we found some areas of governance required improvement to ensure adequate oversight and compliance with all areas of service delivery.

Governance systems had been improved to ensure there was greater oversight of aspects of care delivery. A television screen had been installed in the management office with a live feed of call attendance to provide oversight of call scheduling and ensure prompt action if a call was recorded as late. Matrixes were in place to review compliance with quality assurance systems. These systems included welfare visits and telephone monitoring to ensure people were happy with the care and support they received, and ensure staff were adhering to the provider’s policies and procedures. The care review system had been improved to ensure a regular review of people’s care and the support provided. This enabled the management team to have oversight of their service and ensure it reflected people’s current needs. We saw where people requested changes to their care this was accommodated.

Systems were also in place to monitor and track compliance with staff supervision and spot checks. However, we found these were not always kept up to date and data for 2025 had not been inputted. Whilst these processes were undertaken and staff were adequately supported, this system was not reliable to ensure complete oversight of the process. The care manager told us this was partly due to staff sickness and they would ensure it was addressed.

The management team were aware of their responsibility to notify CQC of events that occurred at the service in line with their regulatory responsibilities.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.

The registered manager and her management team had taken the time to reflect on their previous assessment and identify lessons learned. There was now a clear improvement plan in place and the team were committed to improving the quality and safety of their systems and processes. Additional training had been sought to ensure staff fully understood and were competent at using the electronic care records system in place.