• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Walton Homecare

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

206 Station Road, Bamber Bridge, Preston, Lancashire, PR5 6TQ (01772) 330975

Provided and run by:
Walton Care Limited

All Inspections

27 April 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 27 April 2016 when we visited the service's office. We also spoke with people who used the service and staff following our visit to the office. The inspection was unannounced, which meant the provider did not know we would be visiting to inspect.

The service provided care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 80 people were using the service.

The service is required to have a registered manager in place. 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 registered manager had left the service at short notice prior to our inspection. The provider had recruited a suitable manager who was in the process of registering with the commission.

Everyone we spoke with told us they felt the service was safe. They explained this was because the service was reliable and that they received support from a consistent staff team that knew how to keep people safe.

We found the recruitment procedures that had been implemented by the service were sufficiently robust. This helped to ensure only suitable candidates were employed to work with people whom the service supported.

The provider deployed sufficient numbers of suitable qualified and experienced staff at all times. This helped to ensure people received the care and support they needed, when they needed it. Staff attendance at visits was monitored electronically by the provider to ensure visits took place as planned. No one we spoke with had ever experienced a missed visit.

The service undertook a comprehensive range of risk assessments and ensured staff knew how to mitigate any risks in order to keep people safe. This included where the service helped people to manage their own medicines safely.

People told us that staff knew what they were doing and had the necessary skills and knowledge to ensure their needs were met effectively. Staff told us and records confirmed staff received a variety of training and support to enable them to fulfil their roles.

Consent had been sought from people before any care or support was provided to them. The provider had implemented policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 which were followed in practice.

The service worked well with other healthcare services, to try to ensure people's health and wellbeing was maintained and in response to people's needs.

People who received support from the service to eat and drink confirmed they were encouraged to eat and drink healthily. Staff offered to prepare snacks and drinks for people who they did not support with meals and recorded people's dietary intake. When there were concerns about someone's dietary intake, this was raised with the manager who sought professional guidance and support.

Staff knew people well and respected their preferences. The service gathered lots of information about people, their like and dislikes so that care and support was planned to meet their needs in the way they wanted. People told us they were involved in reviewing their plans of care.

The service respected people's cultural and religious needs. People told us that staff always respected their privacy and maintained their dignity.

The service undertook comprehensive assessments of people's needs and ensured they had the right staff in place before they took on any new clients. This helped to ensure that people's needs could be met consistently.

People's risk assessments and written plans of care were regularly reviewed and update in line with people's circumstances, which helped to ensure the service met people's changing needs.

People we spoke with knew how to make a complaint or raise concerns with the service and had confidence in the management team to resolve any issues.

Everyone we spoke with told us they felt the service was well-led. People told us that communication from the provider was good and that they were kept up to date with any changes in the service.

Every person we spoke with told us they would, and did, recommend the service to people who were in similar circumstances.

The provider took a hands on approach to the service and had developed good working relationships with all the agencies involved in people`s care.

A range of quality assurance systems had been implemented and were operated effectively. This helped to ensure that people received a high quality service which met their needs and protected their rights.

15 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We found staff underwent training around gaining consent and people were able to make choices about the support they received. One person said; "They [staff] always ask before doing anything."

People received support that met their needs. The provider undertook comprehensive assessments of people's needs and involved them and families in drawing up appropriate plans of support. A person we spoke with told us; "The service is absolutely wonderful...All the staff are very caring and helpful.'

The provider employed a sufficient number of suitably qualified staff to provide the support people needed. The provider used a computerised system to draw up rotas to help maintain consistency of the care staff that attended calls. People commented that staffing seemed to have improved recently.

Information was available to demonstrate systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provision on a regular basis.

We found the provider had implemented a suitable complaints policy and made people aware of how to make a complaint. People felt able to approach the service manager to raise any issues.

We inspected the completeness, accuracy and security of records at the service. We found them to be securely stored, well organised and up to date.

27 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with several people using the service and some relatives. In general, we obtained positive comments about the service people received. However, several people told us staff were not always punctual and they did not have the same carers supporting them. The people we spoke with told us staff were pleasant and respectful and their privacy and dignity was always protected.

Comments we received included:

"I am very satisfied with Walton Care, except for the time keeping. I never know when the carers are coming. They keep altering the times. I never know when to lock the door at night. They came at 10.45pm the other night instead of my slot of 9.30pm and they don't let me know when they are going to be late."

"They (the staff) are pretty good on the whole. I have no worries about the care I get. The staff keep to their times reasonably well and have the right attitudes."

"I normally get a rota telling me which staff are coming, but this holiday I didn't get one, so all different ones turned up. I used to have all the same carers, but now I get all and sundry. They ask me what to do, although there is a care plan here, which they could read."

24 November 2011

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with at the inspection gave mixed views about the quality of the service provided by Walton Home Care. One person said the service "is excellent, I am very pleased with it". Another said that they were "overall satisfied". Some one else said that, "Some carers are very good". People felt that the service was generally reliable with carers usually punctual and rarely missing visits.

However people did not always feel that their views and preferences were taken into account, even though they were involved and consulted. One said, "I have told them what we want but nothing changes". Most people that we spoke with had experienced larger than they would like, groups of carers some of whom did not know or understand the needs of the person. In two case this had resulted in unsatisfactory support which did not meet their needs, and in one of these unsafe practices had occurred. One person felt that some carers did not have the right understanding and attitude.

We were also told that correct procedures had not been followed when unsafe practices had come to light and this had potentially put people at risk.

Staff told us that they were well trained and supported, and that they were not expected to work alone with people until they felt sufficiently confident and competent. However this was not the view of all service users and their relatives about some staff.