Rated Care Homes

Premier Care - Halton Branch

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 4 ratings

    Its last inspection moved it down from Good to Requires improvement.

  • This month

    The latest rating was published.

  • 3 of 10

    rated home care services in Halton are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Premier Care - Halton Branch: inspection record

Home care, Halton

Rated Requires improvement in October 2026, down from Good.

Premier Care - Halton Branch: 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

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Support at Home Ltd (Good, 0.6 miles away) and Foundary House (Good, 1.2 miles away).

Nearest home care services:

  1. –
    Comfort Call Ltd – Widnes Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Human Support Group – Cheshire West Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Support at Home Ltd Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. RI
    Oakmeadow Community Support Centre Requires improvement, 1 mile away
  5. G
    Foundary House Good, 1.2 miles away

See all home care services in Halton

See all home care services in Widnes

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 27 October 2026 (assessment visit 10 September 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of Assessment: Remote activity began on 21 September 2026.

Premier Care Halton provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes in the community. At the time of the inspection there were 184 people receiving support.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

We completed this inspection remotely, which means we did not physically visit the office location.

People and relatives were positive about the care provided and consistently told us they felt safe, well supported and treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They spoke positively about the continuity of care provided by regular staff, responsive management, effective communication and the positive impact care had on their wellbeing, recovery and ability to remain independent at home.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding responsibilities, skin integrity management, medicines support and reporting concerns, and most told us they felt supported and had sufficient time to provide care. Evidence showed the provider had policies and processes in place to support safeguarding, complaints management, consent, whistleblowing and partnership working. There was also evidence of positive community engagement and responsive action when concerns or complaints were raised.

However, concerns were identified in relation to governance and record keeping. Although people's experiences of care were largely positive, records did not always provide assurance that care was delivered consistently in line with care plans. We found examples of incomplete recording relating to pressure care, skin integrity monitoring, nutrition, repositioning and medicines-related care. Some care plans contained contradictory, unclear or outdated information and did not always fully reflect risks or guidance from external professionals.

We also identified concerns regarding the effectiveness of oversight of recurring risks, including fire safety incidents, behavioural incidents and medication-related alerts. Audits had previously identified weaknesses in care planning, staff records and call-time monitoring. Although the provider had implemented extensive improvement plans and many actions had been completed, some evidence suggested improvements had not always been consistently embedded or sustained.

Overall, people received caring and person-centred support from committed staff, but further work was needed to strengthen governance systems, record keeping, and quality assurance processes to ensure improvements were consistently maintained and people were fully protected from potential risks.

We have identified a breach in relation to governance and record keeping.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this inspection.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.

    This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.
    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to the way records were presented and maintained at the service.

  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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.
    This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred
    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance.

Questions to ask the service

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 27 October 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 27 October 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the service did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Chelsea Hargreaves
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Domiciliary care service
Who it supports
Dementia, Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Mental Health, People who misuse drugs and alcohol, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment

Inspection report

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

3 inspection reports, latest 9 December 2020. Latest assessment published 27 October 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

Provider
Premier Care LimitedBrand: Cera Care
Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
05213770 (opens Companies House)

Premier Care Limited runs 13 services in England, 11 of them in the North West. 8 are rated Good or Outstanding, 2 are rated Requires improvement or Inadequate and 3 have no rating yet.

Other services run by Premier Care Limited

  1. G
    Premier Care - Bradford Branch Good. Home care, Bradford, Yorkshire and the Humber
  2. G
    Premier Care Blackburn Branch Good. Home care, Blackburn with Darwen
  3. G
    Premier Care Bolton Branch Good. Home care, Bolton
  4. G
    Premier Care Limited - Rochdale Branch Good. Home care, Rochdale

See all 13 services run by Premier Care Limited

Getting help from Halton Borough 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 Premier Care - Halton Branch provide nursing care?
The Care Quality Commission's register does not list nursing care for Premier Care - Halton Branch.
When was Premier Care - Halton Branch last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Premier Care - Halton Branch was published on 27 October 2026.
Who runs Premier Care - Halton Branch?
Premier Care - Halton Branch is run by Premier Care Limited. It runs 13 services in England, 11 of them in the North West.
What is Premier Care - Halton Branch's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 27 October 2026.

Contact

Address
Ashley House, Ashley Way West, Widnes, WA8 7RP Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Support at Home Ltd (Good, 0.6 miles away) and Foundary House (Good, 1.2 miles away).

Nearest home care services:

  1. –
    Comfort Call Ltd – Widnes Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Human Support Group – Cheshire West Not yet rated, less than 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Support at Home Ltd Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. RI
    Oakmeadow Community Support Centre Requires improvement, 1 mile away
  5. G
    Foundary House Good, 1.2 miles away

See all home care services in Halton

See all home care services in Widnes