Hartwig Care (Weybridge)

“CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment, the service supported 25 people with personal care.”

“Who the service is for”

“The service supports older people, some of whom may be living with dementia, and younger adults with specific healthcare conditions.”

“The provider is registered to support autistic people and people with a learning disability at this service. 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’, which meant people were treated with dignity, their choices were respected, and their independence was promoted and encouraged.”

“Our view of the service”

“We carried out this assessment between 26 August 2026 and 3 September 2026.”

“This service was previously rated 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.”

“Before our assessment, we reviewed the provider's Provider Information Return (PIR). This is an annual return providers submit to CQC about the service they deliver, including how they monitor quality, make improvements and meet people's needs.”

“During the assessment, we spoke with people who used the service and relatives to hear their views about the service and the care and support provided. We obtained feedback from staff about the training, information and support they received to carry out their roles.”

“In the months preceding our assessment, there had been a period of instability within the management team which had affected the running of the service. The registered manager had begun an extended period away from the service and the previous care coordinator left their post at around the same time. This had affected the quality of care some people received, communication with people who used the service, relatives and staff, and the support provided to staff.”

“Since that time, the provider had taken action to address these concerns, including appointing an interim manager and a new care coordinator and putting in place support from the provider’s regional operations team. These measures had reinstated the continuity of care people received, improved channels of communication, and enhanced the support available to staff.”

“Staff recognised the value of promoting people's independence and respecting their choices. One member of staff described how they had worked with a person over a number of years to maintain their independence and support them to remain in control of their care. The member of staff told us, “My client is fiercely independent. We have worked together over the last 5 years to preserve this as much as possible. She is comfortable enough with me to ask for help and also to refuse it if she thinks it is not necessary.””

“Staff understood the importance of gaining people’s consent to their care on a day-to-day basis. One member of staff told us, “I gain consent by asking them if they permit me to assist them with things they need help with, especially personal care.””

“Staff told us they received enough information about people’s needs before they began to support them. One member of staff said, “All customers have their information and likes and dislikes on the app and if we go to a new customer, the office gives us a call to tell us a bit about them. I feel confident when…”