- Homecare service
We Care SW Ltd
Assessment report published 2 November 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
We Care SW Ltd is a home care service and provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of the assessment, they were providing personal care to 30 people.
This service supports older people; people with physical disabilities; people with sensory impairments; younger adults and people living with dementia, who are living in their own homes.
We carried out this assessment from 23 September to 9 October 2026. This service was previously rated as 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.
People told us they felt safe with the staff supporting them and were confident concerns would be acted upon.
Staff promoted a good culture of safety through effective safeguarding practices, clear reporting procedures, and proactive risk management. Risks were assessed and managed in partnership with people, helping to balance safety with independence and choice. Some people had complex mental health needs, and this was well managed and recorded. Robust systems were in place to monitor and review accidents, incidents, and safeguarding concerns, enabling the service to identify themes, trends, and opportunities for learning and continuous improvement.
Staff were recruited safely, with appropriate pre-employment checks completed to help ensure they were suitable to work with people using the service.
Staff were well supported through training, supervision, spot checks, and competency assessments, and electronic medicines management systems were robust. One staff member said, “The company provides training for everything and won’t put you in a situation you feel nervous or worried about until enough training has been provided and the carer feels confident with carrying out the calls. If you also require or would like further training, it is always encouraged and done.” Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs, visits were usually completed on time and for the correct duration. People felt staff had the skills, equipment, and support needed to provide safe care.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment where there is appropriate legal authority. We assessed whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), ensuring people were not subject to unlawful or unnecessary restrictions and were supported to have choice, control, and independence in their daily lives. People told us staff sought their consent appropriately and involved them in decisions about their care wherever possible. Staff demonstrated an understanding of supporting people to make their own decisions and recognised the importance of respecting people's wishes when they had capacity to do so. The service was aware of when people had legally authorised representatives, such as those holding a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA), to make decisions on their behalf.
Where required, people's capacity was assessed, and decisions were made in their best interests in line with the MCA.
People reported positive outcomes and felt staff understood their health, wellbeing, communication, and care needs. Care was regularly reviewed and adapted to reflect changing needs and preferences. People felt supported to maintain their health and wellbeing through timely involvement of healthcare professionals when required. They had access to care plans and information in formats they could understand, which helped them remain involved in planning and reviewing their care.
Positive and trusting relationships had been developed between people and staff, enabling care and support to be tailored to individual needs and preferences. This helped ensure support remained responsive to any changes.
People consistently described staff as kind, caring, compassionate, and respectful. Care was tailored to people's individual needs, preferences, routines, and goals. People felt listened to, involved in decisions about their care, and treated with dignity and respect. Staff promoted independence, choice, privacy, and consent, supporting people to make their own decisions wherever possible.
Family involvement was respected in line with people's wishes. Staff felt the service fostered a caring culture that balanced the needs of people receiving support with the wellbeing of staff. The provider had an interest in mental health support and there were examples where staff had been supported well. Staff were able to take advantage of a mental health support day every 4 months and spoke highly of the management team.
People told us they were involved in planning their care and were able to influence changes to their support as their needs changed. Care was personalised and responsive to individual circumstances and preferences. One staff member told us how they had supported a person to their hospital appointment as they knew they were anxious. People felt their views were valued through regular care plan reviews and ongoing discussions. People were confident that complaints would be taken seriously and addressed appropriately. The provider sought their feedback on the service annually. People felt able to contact staff and the management team for support and found them willing to listen.
People spoke positively about the service, with most people having used We Care SW Ltd for some years. Leaders promoted an open, transparent, and supportive culture that encouraged learning, continuous improvement, and responsiveness to feedback. Effective governance and quality assurance systems, including audits, supervision, spot checks, and competency assessments, helped ensure people received safe, person-centred care. People and staff felt their feedback was listened to and used to drive improvements, while the management team were consistently described as approachable, responsive, and supportive. Staff valued the open communication, commitment to training and development, and felt respected and well supported, particularly during difficult personal circumstances.
People's experience of this service
Overall, people receiving support were positive about the service. Comments included, “Yes, I am happy with the service I receive. Yes, the staff know my needs and are kind and friendly” and “The carers are very kind, and they stay the right amount of time and they do ring me from the office to check on me.”
People told us they felt safe, respected, and well supported by staff, and said they would feel confident raising concerns if required. They believed concerns were taken seriously and were confident action would be taken to address them. One person told us, “I am very happy with them, and they take time to chat, and I have no issues with any carers. I have their number on my phone if there are any issues.”
People were fully involved in planning their care and support and felt able to influence changes when required. They told us their care was reviewed with them regularly to ensure it continued to meet their needs. One person said, “Yeah, I am involved in my care plan, and they do check into see if I am happy with everything.”
Staff listened to their wishes and preferences about how they wanted their care to be provided. People valued being able to decline support from carers they did not feel were a good match.
People told us staff understood their needs well and promoted independence by encouraging them to do tasks they felt able to manage themselves while providing support where required. They described staff as caring, observant, and skilled at recognising when additional support may be necessary, particularly when people's health needs increased. Relative comments included, “Yes, they are very amiable at the office, and the management is very good” and “Yes, I do like them and they do everything they are meant to do. They have put on a lunchtime visit now and they are very polite and pleasant, and we are very pleased with it”. Consent was sought appropriately, and staff adapted their approach according to people’s individual needs and ability to respond at the time.
Relationships with staff were positive, with staff described as kind, respectful, approachable, and easy to talk to. They looked forward to the visits. People usually saw consistent carers and felt comfortable with the team supporting them. One relative said, “They phone me all the time, let me know what’s happening or that they have bought Mum shopping or her favourite drink on their way.”
People felt supported to maintain their health and wellbeing. People were supported with their medicines with the management team often going above and beyond to ensure people had access to the correct medicines at the right time. One person had become confused about their medicines after a hospital visit, so staff were supporting them and liaising with the hospital as necessary.
Information was provided in a format people could understand, and they had access to an agreed care plan, which most preferred to receive in paper format rather than online. Staff supported them with daily living tasks, including meals and household activities, and consistently used appropriate personal protective equipment.
People told us family involvement was respected and supported where appropriate, and they were able to maintain relationships with family and friends. They reported being asked for feedback about their care through regular reviews and questionnaires.