Innovations24 Limited

Updated 19 January 2026

Date of assessment: 4 February 2026 to 10 February 2026.

Innovation24 is a domiciliary care agency that provides care and support to people living in their own homes. CQC only inspect where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment, 16 people were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

At the time of the inspection, no person with a learning disability or autistic person was receiving a care package. However, we have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

This is the first inspection for this service since it was registered.

This inspection identified that the provider was in breach of 1 legal regulation relating to good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

The provider’s governance systems, processes, and procedures for assessing risks and monitoring quality and safety were not fully effective. These needed to be reviewed and strengthened to support effective care delivery, oversight and leadership and enable sustained improvement. There was no evidence of actual harm, as risks were mitigated by a stable staff team that knew people well. However, these shortfalls increased people's risk of harm.

The provider’s systems and processes did not include robust monitoring and analysis to identify emerging risks, track performance, and drive improvements in the quality and safety of care. In addition, the provider had failed to notify CQC of reportable incidents as required, limiting CQC’s ability to effectively monitor the service.

Guidance for staff about people’s care needs, including information in relation to health conditions, routines, preferences and family, social and work history, were assessed and planned for. However, people’s care plans were not outcome‑focussed, impacting the provider’s ability to review how effectively support was being delivered and whether it was achieving the intended results.

Staff recruitment processes needed some improvement to ensure procedures involving the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) were completed in a timely manner. These checks help identify any criminal history that may affect a person’s suitability to work with vulnerable people.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to deliver safe care and support. The provider was in the process of improving staff support. This included increasing opportunities for staff to discuss their work, training, and development needs. The process for assessing staff competency was also being strengthened. The management team were aware of gaps in some staff training, and actions were underway to address these.

The management team were open and honest and made some immediate improvements during the inspection period. They showed a commitment to further develop and improve the service

Updated 19 January 2026

We spoke with 2 people who used the service and 7 relatives about their experience of the care provided. All, without exception, were positive about the support they received. We also received positive feedback from 4 external professionals, who told us the service worked well with them and supported people effectively.

People told us they would recommend the service to others, citing the quality of care, the trust they felt in staff, the peace of mind the service provided, and the kindness shown by the staff. A person said, “Yes, as they’re [staff] so good. I'd give them a five star review.” A relative said, “I would give the staff 100%. We’ve had carers previously who weren't anywhere near as good as this company.”

People’s overall impression of the service was positive. Many people described the service as “excellent,” “reliable” and “caring”. A small number noted a slight decline linked to staffing pressures, but satisfaction remained high. Care calls were described as mostly punctual. When delays occurred, staff usually contacted people or relatives in advance.

People and relatives said they were involved in assessments and ongoing discussions. People felt care plans were mostly reviewed informally through regular contact with the management team. Some relatives felt reviews could be more formal, but communication about changes was good.

People said it was easy to contact the service, including evenings and weekends, using direct contact numbers. Messages were usually responded to within a reasonable timeframe.

People confirmed care was provided by regular carers and this continuity helped build trust, familiarity and emotional support. People valued relationships with carers, describing them as “kind”, “chatty” and “supportive “ beyond task-based care.

People and relatives told us staff understood individual needs well, particularly in relation to dementia care. Staff adapted communication, routines and support to encourage eating, hydration and comfort. There were no concerns raised about unmet cultural or diverse needs.

Communication was described as good, both in terms of staff communicating with people and also in terms of phone calls, texts and updates to relatives. Families valued proactive communication, particularly around hospital admissions, care changes and planning around holidays.

People and relatives told us they regarded staff as being knowledgeable and well trained, particularly in supporting people living with dementia, mobility needs and complex care. Staff were described as confident, observant and capable of responding appropriately.

Relatives told us support improved health, dignity and quality of life, reduced isolation, and helped people remain safely at home. Families reported reduced stress and peace of mind knowing staff were meeting daily needs consistently.