You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

We have not inspected this service yet

Inspection summaries and ratings from previous provider


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 August 2018

Carewatch (Isle of Wight) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. It is registered to provide a service to older adults, younger adults and children.

Not everyone using Carewatch (Isle of Wight) received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

This inspection was conducted between 21 and 29 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours' notice of our inspection as we needed to be sure key staff members would be available. At the time of the inspection approximately 128 people were receiving a regulated activity from Carewatch (Isle of Wight).

We last inspected the service in April 2017 when we did not identify any breaches of regulation, but rated the service as ‘Requires improvement’. Following that inspection, the registered manager wrote to us detailing the improvements they planned to make.

At this inspection, we found improvements had been made, but some further improvement was needed to ensure risks to people were consistently managed effectively. We found a key staff member was not aware of a serious risk to a person with a serious medical condition and there was a lack information in the care plan of another person who experienced epileptic seizures.

There were enough staff available to attend all calls. However, some people felt the timings of visits was not always consistent and the provider was unable to confirm the level or extent of late calls. We have made a recommendation about this.

Appropriate recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure that only suitable staff were employed.

Where staff supported people to take their medicines, we found this was done in a safe way. Staff followed infection control procedures and used personal protective equipment when needed.

Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse. The registered manager reported incidents appropriately to the local safeguarding authority and cooperated fully with any investigation.

There was a plan in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and staff had been trained to administer basic life support.

People were complementary about the competence of staff and the quality of care they received. New staff completed an effective induction into their role and experienced staff received regular refresher training in all key subjects. Staff were appropriately supported in their role by managers.

Staff followed legislation to protect people’s rights and sought consent before providing care or support to people.

Senior staff conducted assessments of people’s needs before agreeing a package of care. Care plans were informative, up to date and reviewed regularly.

People received personalised care from staff who understood their individual needs well. Staff were flexible and adaptable when people’s needs or wishes changed.

Where staff were responsible for preparing meals, they encouraged people to maintain a healthy, balanced diet based on their individual needs and preferences.

Staff monitored people’s health and supported them to access healthcare services where needed.

Staff were caring and compassionate. They built positive relationships with people, encouraged them to be as independent as possible and involved them in decisions about their care.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and protected their privacy during personal care.

Staff knew how to support people to receive a comfortable, dignified and pain-free death and some had received specialised training in end of life care.

People had confidence in the service and felt it was managed effectively. They knew how to raise a complaint and felt they would be listened to.

There was a clear management structure in place. Most sta

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 4 August 2018

The service was not always safe.

Individual risks to people were not always managed effectively.

There were enough staff deployed to attend all calls. However, some people said the timings of visits was not consistent and the provider was unable to confirm the level of late calls.

Recruitment practices helped ensure only suitable staff were employed.

Where the service supported people to take their medicines, this was done in a safe way by suitably trained staff.

Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse.

There were appropriate systems in place to protect people by the prevention and control of infection.

A business continuity plan was in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 August 2018

The service was effective.

People received effective care from staff who were competent, suitably trained and appropriately supported in their roles.

Staff acted in the best interests of people and followed legislation designed to protect people�s rights.

Where staff were responsible for preparing meals, they encouraged people to maintain a healthy, balanced diet based on their individual needs and preferences.

People were supported to access health professionals when needed. When people were admitted to hospital, staff ensured key information accompanied the person to help ensure continuity of care.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 August 2018

The service was caring.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. They built positive relationships with people and promoted their independence.

Staff protected people�s privacy and respected their dignity.

People, and family members where appropriate, were involved in planning the care and support they received.

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 August 2018

The service was responsive.

Care and support were centred on the individual needs of each person. Care plans were reviewed regularly and staff responded promptly when people�s needs changed.

Staff knew how to support people to receive end of life care that helped ensure their comfort and their dignity.

People knew how to raise a complaint and there was an appropriate complaints procedure in place.

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 August 2018

The service was well-led.

People had confidence in the service and felt it was managed effectively.

There was a clear management structure in place. People benefited from a service where most staff were motivated and happy in their work.

A comprehensive quality assurance process was in place to assess and monitor the service. The provider sought and acted on feedback from people.

The provider had a clear set of values and staff knew what was expected of them.

There was an open and transparent culture, including a whistleblowing policy to enable staff to raise concerns anonymously if needed.