Helping Hands Plymouth

Who the service is for

Helping Hands Plymouth provides support to younger adults, older adults, people living with dementia, people with physical disabilities, people with sensory impairment, autistic people and people living with a learning disability.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 7 September 2026 to 18 September 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.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability, but the provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture’.

We found systems were in place to safeguard people from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff recognised the signs of different types of abuse and understood their responsibility to report concerns to leaders. Accidents and incidents were analysed regularly to identify themes and trends. Leaders took action to mitigate individual, environmental and whole service risks.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. 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. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS (Deprivation of liberty safeguards) within the service.

Staff received regular training, supervision and competency assessments to ensure people’s individual needs were met safely and effectively. This included the safe administration of medications and appropriate monitoring and oversight of clinical tasks. Staff told us, “The training covers all mandatory care standards; alongside specialized training tailored to the specific needs of the people we support.”

Staff were recruited safely and systems were in place to ensure people received the right support at the right time. People told us they have choice about who supports them in their own home, and the same staff members are usually allocated to them for continuity of care.

People’s care records were person centred and reflected their assessed needs, goals and preferences. Staff knew people well and adapted the delivery of support to promote people’s independence, dignity and choice. Staff told us “Person centered care means putting the individual at the heart of every decision. It means respecting their choices and supporting them to live their life the way they choose.”

Care records evidenced escalation and involvement of health professionals where people’s needs changed. Relatives told us they were involved with reviews and always kept informed about changes to their relative’s health and wellbeing. One relative told us that the service played an important role in advocating for their relative when the health needs of the person changed, and they were struggling to get a face-to-face appointment for a professional medical review. This led to a prompt diagnosis and appropriate treatment plan being implemented.

People were encouraged and supported to give regular feedback about the service in a way that met their individual communication needs and preferences. Leaders analysed feedback and developed case study tools for reflection, celebration of success, learning and service development. People, relatives and staff told us they feel confident to raise concerns and suggestions to leaders and they felt supported and listened to. A staff member told us, ‘’My Manager is highly supportive, listens to my feedback and treats me fairly.’’

Governance systems were in place to monitor and support the safety and oversight of the service, including live alerts to monitor care delivery. Audits were completed regularly by appropriately skilled leaders. For example, the governance structure was set up so only the clinical lead could assess, review and audit clinical tasks with tiered oversight from the clinical manager. Audit findings were appropriately actioned through a central service improvement plan. The Provider communicated clear organisational visions and values which staff and leaders understood. The registered manager, was open, engaged and responded promptly throughout the assessment process.