• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Carewatch (North Lancashire)

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Lighthouse Care Centre, 1 Townley Street, Morecambe, Lancashire, LA4 5JQ (01524) 402340

Provided and run by:
County Care Services Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

5 January 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection visit at Carewatch (North Lancashire) was undertaken on 05 January 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service to people living in the community. We needed to be sure someone would be in at the office.

Carewatch (North Lancashire) provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. The agency covers a wide range of dependency needs including older people with a physical or learning disability and older people living with dementia or mental health problems. The agency's office is located close to Morecambe town centre. At the time of our inspection there were 253 people receiving a service from Carewatch (North Lancashire).

The service had 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.

At the last inspection on 21 November 2013, we found the provider was meeting the requirements of the regulations that were inspected.

Staff had received abuse training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care or abusive practices related to the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Staff we spoke with told us they were aware of the safeguarding procedure. One person told us they always felt they were in safe hands, because of the continuity of staff. They said, “I’ve got to have trust and I trust them.”

The provider had put in place procedures around recruitment and selection to minimise the risk of inappropriate employees working with vulnerable people. Required checks had been completed prior to any staff commencing work at the service. This was confirmed from discussions with staff.

We found staffing levels were suitable with an appropriate skill mix to meet the needs of people who used the service. Staffing levels were determined by the number of people being supported and their individual needs.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they were competent and had the skills required. People were supported to meet their care planned requirements in relation to medicines.

Staff members received training related to their role and were knowledgeable about their responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs. The provider ensured staff had the skills to fulfil all care tasks required by people being supported. For example, the registered manager had sought specialised training to ensure staff delivered effective support to one person with complex care needs.

People and their representatives told us they were involved in their care and had discussed and consented to their care packages. We found staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People told us they were mostly supported by the same group of staff. This ensured staff understood the support needs of people they visited and how individuals wanted their care to be delivered. One person we spoke with said, “I don’t like change. I like the same team because they are in my life. They have been brilliant.”

Comments we received demonstrated people were satisfied with the service they received. The registered manager and staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They were committed to providing a good standard of care and support to people in their care. Field care supervisors’ met with people prior to care being delivered. This allowed personalised care plans to be in place before care staff visited. Field care supervisors are not office based and oversee the care staff deliver within the local community setting.

A complaints procedure was available and people we spoke with said they knew how to complain. We saw examples where a complaint had been received, responded to, investigated and the outcome documented. Staff spoken with felt the management team were accessible supportive and approachable and would listen and act on concerns raised.

The registered manager had sought feedback from people receiving support .They had formally consulted with people they supported for input on how the service could continually improve. Quality audits had regularly been used at the time of our inspection. Surveys, telephone monitoring and spot checks had all regularly taken place. They had not always acted on the feedback they received. Meetings for care staff had occurred when management had introduced new policies or procedures. Regular team meetings for staff to meet with the manager, to share information, learn and receive feedback had not occurred.

21 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with twenty people who used the agency, visited two people in their homes, and spoke with eight members of the staff team. We looked at several care plan records to show us how the agency supported people to remain safe and well at home. Information in the care plans identified the support required by people. This included meeting people`s personal care, mental wellbeing and medication needs.

We spoke with members of staff who supported people and their family`s with palliative care known as End of Life Care. The care staff explained to us how this part of the service operated and how they worked in partnership with the local palliative care team to support people.

We looked at a sample of staff rotas covering the week we inspected. These indicated there were arrangements in place for a skill mix of staff to be on duty to meet the needs of people using the agency.

Our discussions with a range of staff confirmed they felt well supported. They also told us they were able to access support in an informal way if they required it. Some staff we spoke with had been given support to take on new roles within the agency and some with additional responsibilities.

There were a range of audits and systems in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided.

21 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We looked at people's care records, spoke with people about their experience of using the agency, spoke with staff and carer's. People gave us positive feedback about the agency and told us that they would put things right if ever they had any concerns. The service user guide told people they could request a change of carer if they wanted to and from the feedback we received the agency did respond quickly to any requests. We found that people were involved in their care. Some of the care plan records were accurate and reviewed regularly. These are some of the comments we received,

' I am quite satisfied with Carewatch, the girls are very good'.

'At the moment we have some very good carers'.

'We have a young carer who is extremely good'.

23, 25 May 2011

During a routine inspection

We spoke with a number of people who use the service and some relatives. The feedback we received during these conversations was very positive and none of the people we spoke to expressed any concerns about the service they received.

People told us that they felt confident in the agency to provide safe and appropriate support that met their needs. People said that they felt involved in the developing of their care plans and told us that they felt able to ask for changes or raise concerns at any time.

People spoke very highly of their care workers. Comments were consistently positive and included;

'They really are a good lot. They are good at what they do but you can have a laugh and a joke as well. I look forward to them coming.'

'They are lovely ' they couldn't be better.'

'The carers are so friendly and kind. I wouldn't change any one of them.'

'They are all nice girls and fellas. Everyone of them is a credit to the agency.'

People told us that they felt safe with their care workers and that they felt their care was provided in a way that promoted their rights and dignity. One older person said 'I know they will always look after me no matter what happens.'

People said that their carers generally arrived on time and were flexible and helpful during their visits. One person told us 'Whatever I want, she'll do it, I only have to ask.'

People also felt that consistency was good and told us that they generally had the same carers. One person said that they sometimes got different carers at the weekend but told us they didn't mind because 'they all seemed to know what they were doing.'

We also spoke with officers from the Local Authority who monitor standards on behalf of those commissioning the service. They told us that they found managers cooperative and always willing to work with them. They also said that they had no concerns about the agency or the standard of care provided.