Rated Care Homes

Constant Healthcare Ltd

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 2 ratings

    Rated Good at every inspection since 2018.

  • 2 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 43 of 58

    rated home care services in Kirklees are rated Good, like this one.

Constant Healthcare Ltd: inspection record

Home care, Kirklees

Rated Good in August 2026.

Constant Healthcare Ltd: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

  1. G
    ASK4CARE - Huddersfield Good, 0.8 miles away
  2. RI
    Nestora Home Care Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away
  3. G
    Medevent Limited Good, 0.9 miles away
  4. G
    Mencap in Kirklees (DCA) Good, 1.3 miles away
  5. G
    Owen Care and Support Limited Good, 1.5 miles away

See all home care services in Kirklees

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 20 August 2026 (assessment visit 3 August 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Constant Healthcare Limited is a care at home service providing personal care to older people. At the time of this assessment 81 people were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

This service provides care and support to people who are living in their own homes,

some of whom may be living with Dementia or have a mental health need.

We carried out this assessment between 11 and 14 August 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.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. This can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). When people receive care and treatment in their own homes an application must be made to the Court of Protection for them to authorise people to be deprived of their liberty. At the time of assessment, no one was deprived of their liberty or had any restrictions placed on them.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and told us about requesting consent from people before delivering care.

People received support from staff who understand their individual needs and supported them to remain as independent as possible within their own homes.

Care plans and risk assessments were thoroughly completed, person-centred and included detailed information about people’s lives, health conditions, preferences, environ mental risks and support needs. Care plans contained SMART objectives (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound) which is a nationally recognised approach to effective goal setting. This supported people and the service to create clear, achievable goals which encouraged people to remain as independent as possible whilst improving their health and well-being.

Accurate daily visit records were logged onto the service’s system which evidenced people received personalised and responsive support with personal care, medicines, nutrition and emotional wellbeing.

Staff monitored changes in people’s health and involved other services and relatives where appropriate.

The service had a robust recruitment process in place to ensure staff were recruited safely. Staff received thorough inductions, training and regular spot checks to ensure they were competent to deliver safe care. Staff told us there were enough trained staff deployed to meet people’s needs, and they were offered additional hours or shifts if the service required unexpected cover.

Staff spoke positively about the service and the personalised care provided. A staff member said, “I have built relationships with the people I care for; they really look forward to seeing me”. Staff generally told us managers were approachable and supportive. They felt able to raise concerns and believed people were safe when receiving care. A staff member said, “The service looks after us. I’m very happy here”.

Staff received safeguarding training, could identify the different types of abuse and knew how to escalate any concerns. We found evidence of safeguarding referrals being made to the local authority; however, on 2 occasions a statutory notification had not been submitted to the Care Quality Commission (CQC). This was discussed with the management team who were open and transparent and took immediate action to address their learning and understanding of processes.

We identified some inconsistencies with the management of medications around the recording of pain patch rotation, some stock counts, and the omission of some people's 'as and when' (PRN) protocols on their electronic medication administration record.

Staff spoke about people with kindness, compassion and respect. One told us, “Before entering [person’s] room I will introduce myself, so they know I'm there. I listen to people, so I know how they want their care delivered. I make sure curtains are closed to maintain dignity. I really try to involve them in their care. I'm there for them, not for myself.”

The management team had effective oversight of the service’s performance and carried out regular spot checks to ensure appropriate and safe care was delivered.

The service had audits in place which covered care records, medicines management and training compliance.

Leaders were visible and approachable. One staff member told us, “I am a very open person, and I like to work with management. I can always ring the office for any support.”

  1. Safe

    Good

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained a good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery

  5. Well-led

    Good

    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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care

Questions to ask the service

  1. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.
  2. Ask how visit times are agreed and who covers when your usual carer is away.

Registration details

Registered manager
Stephen Mungofa
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

1 inspection report, latest 16 March 2018. Latest assessment published 20 August 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
10005483 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Kirklees Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Constant Healthcare Ltd provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Constant Healthcare Ltd.
When was Constant Healthcare Ltd last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Constant Healthcare Ltd was published on 20 August 2026.
Who runs Constant Healthcare Ltd?
Constant Healthcare Ltd is run by Constant Healthcare Ltd.
What is Constant Healthcare Ltd's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 20 August 2026.

Contact

Phone
01484 768160
Address
First Floor, 407 New Hey Road, Huddersfield, HD3 3XE Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    ASK4CARE - Huddersfield Good, 0.8 miles away
  2. RI
    Nestora Home Care Requires improvement, 0.8 miles away
  3. G
    Medevent Limited Good, 0.9 miles away
  4. G
    Mencap in Kirklees (DCA) Good, 1.3 miles away
  5. G
    Owen Care and Support Limited Good, 1.5 miles away

See all home care services in Kirklees