The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Carewatch (North Birmingham)

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Claverdon House, 25 Sutton New Road, Erdington, Birmingham, West Midlands, B23 6XB (0121) 382 3106

Provided and run by:
A Peel Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

20 and 21 January 2015

During a routine inspection

This was an announced inspection, which took place 20 and 21 January 2015. We gave the provider 24 hours notice that we would be visiting the service. This was because the service provides domiciliary care and we wanted to be sure that staff would be available. We last inspected the service on 17 April 2014; there were no breaches of legal requirements at that inspection.

Carewatch North Birmingham is a privately owned service, which provides a personal care service to people living in their own homes.

There was a registered manager in post 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.

All the people we spoke with said they received a safe service. Clear procedures were in place to ensure that people received a service that was safe; staff followed the procedures to ensure the risk of harm to people was reduced. The risk of harm to people receiving a service was assessed and managed appropriately; this ensured that people received care and support in a safe way. Where people received support from staff with taking prescribed medicines, this was done in a way that ensured the risk to people was minimised.

People told us that they felt that there were enough staff employed to meet their needs and offer them a reliable and flexible service. Everyone that used the service and their relatives felt the staff that supported them were trained and competent. Staff received the training development and support needed to ensure they did their job well and provided an effective service.

The provider had not ensured all staff had sufficient understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure that they protected people’s rights. The provisions of the MCA are used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions about the care or treatment they receive.

People told us that where required staff supported them with their nutrition and health care needs. All the people spoken with told us they had a good relationship with the staff that supported them. People said they were able to make decisions about their care and were actively involved in how their care was planned and delivered. People were able to raise their concerns or complaints and these were thoroughly investigated and responded to, so people were confident they were listened to and their concerns taken seriously.

Everyone spoken with said they received a good quality service. The management of the service was stable, with robust processes in place to monitor the quality of the service. People were asked to comment on the quality of service they received and the information was used to improve the service.

17 April 2014

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we held telephone interviews with nine people that used the service and two relatives to talk to them about their experience. We spoke with the registered manager, office manager, an assessment manager and seven care workers. We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask:

Is the service safe?

Everyone that we spoke with said that they were safe with the staff that supported them. One person told us, 'Yes, I feel absolutely safe with all the staff.'

We saw that people had an assessment of their needs and associated risks. A plan of care was completed to enable staff to offer care and support to people in a safe way. Staff told us that they received training and support to enable them to offer care and support safely.

Staff personnel records that we looked at contained all the information required by the Health and Social Care Act to ensure that people were safeguarded.

Care records that we looked at showed that where people required support with taking their medication there were safe system's in place to support them

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. Whilst no one currently using this service was subjected to a Deprivation of liberty safeguard. The provider has employed someone with the skills who would be able to guide staff in ensuring people's rights were protected.

Is the care effective?

All the people and their relatives we spoke with told us that they were receiving the care that they needed and they were happy with the care. One person told us, 'I can't say a bad word about them. I have had care from two other care services and Care Watch is the best.' We saw that there were systems in place to ensure that people received their care as planned.

Is the service caring?

Everyone that we spoke with told us that the care workers that supported them were caring. One person told us, 'They are caring and respectful.' Another person said. 'They are very caring and they have been good to me.'

All staff spoken with talked about the people they cared for in a caring and respectful way. All staff knew how to treat people with dignity and respect. One person told us, "They have always shown me respect."

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People that we spoke with told us that their care workers did what they wanted them to do. One person said, 'Everything is in order and they do everything I ask them to do.' Another person told us, 'They are reliable there is a turnover of carers, but they all come with experience."

All the people that we spoke with knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. However, no one that we spoke with had made a complaint and everyone said they had no reason to complain. One person commented, 'I have never made a complaint, because I have no need to complain.' We looked at a sample of a complaint received. We saw that this had been completed in line with the complaints policy. People can be assured that complaints are investigated and action taken as necessary.

Is the service well led?

We saw that the service had a staffing structure that would enable the service to be managed appropriately. This included a manager that we have registered to be responsible for the running of the service. People were consulted about the quality of service they received. Comments and suggestions were analysed to identify where improvements were needed and action taken where necessary to improve the service.

4 April 2013

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we held telephone interviews with six people who used the service and two of their relatives. We also spoke with the provider, the manager of the service and three care workers.

People that we spoke with said that staff discussed their care with them. One person told us, 'They always talk to you about what they are doing.' We found that the provider did not establish whether or not people being cared for had the capacity to agree to their care before asking relatives to give consent.

Everyone that we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care they received. One person told us, 'I couldn't wish for a better service.' We found that people experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

People that we spoke with said that the staff would support them to access other services if needed. We found that the provider worked in co-operation with others to ensure that people's needs were met.

We found that the provider had appropriate systems in place to support people with taking their medication.

People that we spoke with said they had no concerns about the staff that visited them. We found that the provider did not fully ensure that people were cared for by staff that had received all the necessary checks.

All the people that we spoke with were confident that their concerns would be addressed. We found that systems were in place to address people's concerns.

21 August and 3 September 2012

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we held telephone interviews with four people who use the service and two of their relatives. We also spoke with the provider, the manager of the service and two care workers.

People that we spoke with said that they and their relatives were involved in agreeing and planning their care.

We found that people's needs were not appropriately assessed and planned for which could affect the safety of the care they received. People told us they were happy with the care they received and had no concerns whatsoever about the service. One person told us 'There is no problem with the care. We have four visits a day and two care workers at each visit. They know what they are doing.'

People told us they felt safe using the service and with the staff that visit them. We found that people who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse.

We found that where people required support with their medication the system for offering this support did not ensure that people received their medication safely.

People said they were happy with the staff that supported them

People said they had no concerns about the service. One person said. 'They come on time and if they are held up for any reason they let me know.'