Helping Hands Wigston

Who the service is for

Helping Hands Wigston provides support to younger adults, older adults, people living with dementia, people with physical disabilities and people living with sensory impairments. At the time of the inspection, 118 people were being supported with the regulated activity.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 23 April to 8 May 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

Safeguarding systems were in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse, staff understood their responsibility and were knowledgeable about different types of abuse and how and who they would report concerns to. Staff understood the process of recording accidents and incidents, including escalating concerns to leaders. Incident reports were regularly analysed to identify any themes or trends to improve people’s safety. Risks to people were identified and actions in place to mitigate risks, including environmental safety.

We checked and found that staff and management worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice control and freedom over their lives.

Staff had received training and ongoing support from leaders to ensure they had the training and competence to carry out their roles safely and effectively, this included the safe administration of medication.

The service demonstrated a culture of person-centred care, where staff understood people as individuals and adapted support to meet their needs, preferences and lived experiences. Care was delivered in a way that promoted people’s independence, dignity and emotional wellbeing, with evidence of positive outcomes. People’s health and wellbeing were monitored, with appropriate escalation to professionals when concerns were identified.

Staff demonstrated a commitment to responding to people’s emotional as well as physical needs. For example, a person was supported by staff to achieve a personal goal of getting a dog, which helped them to leave the house more regularly, reduced anxiety and improved their overall mental wellbeing and quality of life.

Care was delivered by consistent staff who knew people well. This also supported staff to recognise changes in people’s needs and respond effectively.

People were encouraged and supported to express their views and be actively involved in their care, with communication tailored to their individual needs. For example, one person with communication difficulties following a stroke was supported to use a combination of their own speech and an assistive communication device, enabling them to express their needs and preferences more effectively.

Care plans were person centred and provided staff with detailed information on how to support people based on their assessed needs, choices and preferences. A staff member said, “Our customers care plans are well detailed with their health needs and how we can support them.” Another staff member said, “Care plans explain people’s health needs and how to support them. For example, I go to an individual with a certain health condition, and it has all the information in the care plan of what I need to know and how I can meet [their] needs.”

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the importance of ensuring that people with protected characteristics experienced equitable care, support, and outcomes, without disadvantage or discrimination. A staff member said, “Although care plans are different, the end goal is still the same. We are there to provide care, and to ensure our customers are happy and safe within their homes.”

Leaders had developed case studies as a structured tool for reflection, learning and continuous improvement, capturing detailed examples of care delivery to demonstrate what has worked well and how practice could be developed further.

Systems were in place to support the safety and effectiveness of the service, including live alerts to monitor care delivery, supporting oversight and ensuring people received their planned care calls at the expected times. Audits were completed regularly by leaders however, these required further strengthening to ensure they consistently identified risks and areas for improvement. For example, records did not always evidence the site of application for transdermal pain relief patches, as required to support safe site rotation, maintain skin integrity, and ensure effective administration.

The provider had clear visions and values that were understood by leaders and staff. Staff told us, “The visions and values of the service are to provide the best care that we can to all our customers. And just spreading kindness and happiness.” And “We are a person-centred community, who value our customers’ needs and comfort.”

We received mixed feedback from staff in relation to their experience of working at the service. Whilst some staff described feeling supported and spoke positively about working for the service, with one staff member saying, “I think it is well manged because they keep the staff updated on things that are going on with our customers and they make sure we are up to date with our training”, others reported they did not always feel valued, treated equally or listened to. This feedback was shared with the registered manager to support ongoing improvement in staff engagement and organisational culture.