We carried out a review of the data available to us about Watch Home Care Services Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Watch Home Care Services Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Our last inspection of the service was carried out in February 2015. At that inspection we rated the service as good. At this inspection in January 2018 we found the service remained good.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own house in the community. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults.
Watch Home Care Services Limited is registered to carry out the regulated activity of personal care. The agency’s office is located in the centre of Chorley and is readily accessible for people using the service and staff. The service provides personal care and domestic support to people living in their own homes in Chorley and the surrounding area. At the time of our inspection 37 people were receiving support from the service, 21 of whom received personal care as part of their support.
There was a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.
Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.
Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.
People received their medicines as prescribed and when needed and appropriate records had been completed. No-one spoken with raised concerns about their medicines.
Staffing levels were seen to be sufficient to meet the assessed needs of the people. People and relatives told us that staff were consistent and turned up on time.
People had been supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of protecting and respecting people’s human rights. Staff spoke well about confidentiality, privacy and dignity and this came through when speaking with people.
The service had information with regards to support from an external advocate should this be required by them.
Care plans contained a good level of person centred information with good guidance for staff. People who wished to be involved in care reviews did so.
A number of audits were undertaken to ensure the on-going quality of the service was monitored appropriately and lessons were learned from issues that occurred.
The service communicated well with people, relatives and staff. We saw evidence of a number of ways this was done including memo’s, newsletters and spot-checks.
The feedback from people and relatives was very positive and we received lots of comments from them about the agency, its staff and management.
This inspection was conducted on 6 February 2015 by a lead Adult Social Care Inspector from the Care Quality Commission. The provider had been given 48 hours’ notice of our planned visit, in accordance with our inspection methodologies of Domiciliary Care services. This was because it was a small service and we wanted to ensure that someone was present to speak with.
Watch Home Care Services Ltd is registered to carry out the regulated activity of personal care. The agency's office is located in the centre of Chorley and is readily accessible for people using the service. The service provides personal care to people living in their own homes in Chorley and the surrounding area. At the time of our inspection 74 people were receiving care and support from the service.
There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People who used the service were safe. People were confident in reporting any concerns about a person’s safety and were competent to deliver the care and support needed by those who used the service. However some people’s training in relation to safeguarding was not kept up to date.
We have made a recommendation about updating the training of staff.
Some people were supported at meal times to ensure that they had a balanced diet. People’s care plans reflected this within a section entitled ‘Eating and Drinking’. We saw within one care plan that there was insufficient information available for staff to fully support that individual with their nutritional needs. The last documented review for that individual was from 2011.
We have made a recommendation that the service ensures that care plans contain relevant, up to date information.
Records showed that relevant checks had been made to ensure new staff members were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
People’s care was based on an assessment of their needs, with information being gathered from a variety of sources. Evidence was available to demonstrate that people had been involved in making decisions about the way care and support was delivered. However much of the information within care plans was task orientated and not personalised to the individual.
We have made a recommendation that that care plans are written in a person centred manner.
People’s privacy and dignity were consistently respected. People told us they were comfortable in the presence of staff and their healthcare needs were supported.
Staff spoke with felt supported and spoke highly of their managers. We saw that clear lines of accountability were in place throughout the organisation.
Staff told us they felt supported in their role and that they had the opportunity to develop their skills. They also told us that managers were approachable and listened to any concerns or ideas they had.
The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health and safety of people using the service and others.
People's personal records were accurate, fit for purpose and securely maintained. Other records required to be kept were maintained and held securely.
'The agency is very well run. I find them very responsive to whatever we want'.
'They provide a very reliable service. I have a settled group of staff visiting me who understand my needs very well'.
'I discussed my needs with the manager and agreed on the support they would provide. I approved my care plan and I am very happy with the service they provide'.
Information received from Lancashire councils contracts monitoring team confirmed they currently had no concerns with the service being provided by the agency.
People were involved in their assessment of needs and the development of their care plan. Their views were taken into account and they were therefore able to influence the delivery of their service. However, people's preferences about how they wished their care to be delivered were not always included in the care plan.
People were satisfied with the support they received with their medication. However, the care staff were not maintaining accurate up to date records of the medication administered, which meant there was the potential for error.
People felt the manager and the staff team were approachable and accessible and they could talk to them at any time if they had any concerns or queries.