Watling Court is an assisted living service. People live in their own flats within a shared complex. They have a tenancy agreement that includes the provision of a lunchtime meal and access to out of hours staff for emergencies.

Personal care is provided to people by the domiciliary care agency, which is known operationally as Caring Companions, based at Watling court. However, people can choose to use other care agencies if they prefer. Longer calls can be agreed for support to bathe and shower and shorter calls can be provided for help with medicines. The registered provider refers to the people using the service as tenants. There were 49 people using the personal care service at the time of the inspection. This inspection was carried out on 17 March 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

There was a manager in post who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 our inspection on 3 March 2016 we found breaches of regulation relating to consent, governance, staff recruitment and staff training. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made and the regulations were being met.

People told us they were very happy using the service and felt safe and well cared for. The registered manager had ensured the culture of the service was person centred and flexible to meet people’s needs and wishes.

People were protected by staff that understood how to recognise and respond to signs of abuse. Risks to people’s wellbeing were assessed and staff knew what action they needed to take to keep people safe. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how the risks of recurrence could be reduced.

There was a sufficient number of staff on duty at all times to meet people’s needs in a safe way. The registered provider had systems in place to check the suitability of staff before they began working in the service. People and their relatives could be assured that staff were of good character and fit to carry out their duties. Staff had completed training and qualifications relevant to their role. The registered manager monitored staff training needs to ensure that staff were skilled and competent to meet people’s needs. Staff felt supported in their roles.

Staff identified and met people’s health needs. Where people’s needs changed they sought advice from healthcare professionals and reviewed their care plan. Records relating to the care of people using the service were accurate and complete to allow the registered manager to monitor their needs. People had enough to eat and drink and were supported to make choices about their meals. Staff knew about and provided for people’s dietary preferences and restrictions. Medicines were stored, administered, recorded and disposed of safely and correctly.

Staff communicated effectively with people and treated them with kindness and respect. They knew people well and understood what was important to them. People’s right to privacy was maintained. Staff promoted people’s independence and encouraged people to do as much as possible for themselves. Personalised care and support was provided at an appropriate pace for each person so that they did not feel rushed. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and requests.

Staff sought and obtained people’s consent before they helped them. People’s mental capacity was assessed when necessary about particular decisions. Meetings were held, when needed, to make decisions in people’s best interests, following the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Some documentation in people’s care plan files that related to consent was out of date. We have made a rec

We inspected the service on the 03 March 2016. This inspection was unannounced.

Watling Court is a domiciliary service that provides personal care and support to tenants who live in independent living flats located in a purpose built facility. The main office is located within the living facility at Watling Court. There were 47 people receiving support to meet their personal care needs on the day we inspected.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

People’s views about the service they received were positive. Relatives felt their family members received safe, effective, compassionate, responsive and well led care.

Recruitment practices were not always safe, gaps in employment history had not always been explored.

Medicines were appropriately managed and administered. They were not always appropriately recorded. We made a recommendation about this.

Procedures and guidance in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was in place which included steps that staff should take to comply with legal requirements. Capacity assessments did not follow the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.

Systems to monitor the quality of the service were not effective. Policies and procedures were out of date, which meant staff didn’t have access to up to date information and guidance.

Staff knew and understood how to safeguard people from abuse, they had attended training. The registered manager had appropriately reported safeguarding concerns to the local authority but had not reported this to CQC. The local authority’s policy, procedures and protocols where not available for staff or the registered manager. We made a recommendation about this.

Staff had not received regular support and supervision from their line manager. There were suitable numbers of staff on shift to meet people’s needs.

People’s information was treated confidentially. People’s paper records were stored securely in locked filing cabinets.

People received medical assistance from healthcare professionals when they needed it. Staff knew people well and recognised when people were not acting in their usual manner.

People’s care plans detailed what staff needed to do for a person. The care plans included information about their life history and were person centred.

People had choices of food at each meal time which met their likes, needs and expectations. People were supported to be as independent as possible.

People and relatives told us that staff were kind, caring and communicated well with them.

People and their relatives had been involved with planning their own care. Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

People were given information about how to complain. This was displayed in communal areas of Watling Court.

People’s view and experiences were sought through review meetings and through surveys.

People told us that the service was well run. Staff were positive about the support they received from the manager. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to.

Communication between staff within the service was good. They were made aware of significant events and any changes in people’s behaviour.

We found several breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

As part of our inspection we spoke with ten people who used the service about the care and support they received. We also spoke with the Care Manager and five support staff. During the visit we saw people speaking with the Care Manager and staff members. We noted that the interactions were positive.

People seemed at ease with staff and it was clear that strong professional relationships had been formed. People told us they were involved in their care and were happy with the support provided by the service. Comments included "It's nice", "They provide a very high standard of care" and "I always know what's happening".

We saw that staff respected the privacy and dignity of people by knocking on their front doors and speaking appropriately to them. People told us that staff were "Nice and always chatty" and made them feel "Safe".

We found that people were supported by regular staff who understood their health and social needs. People said that they found the management of the service to be very approachable and open to feedback. They said the manager had responded appropriately to any concerns they had raised.

We saw that the service had good quality assurance systems in place to ensure that the care and support provided was effective and people received a high quality of care.

Watling Court is a small domiciliary care agency, first registered with the Care Quality Commission in September 2011. This was the first inspection of the service since registration.

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We visited three people in their own home as part of this inspection and spoke with them about their experiences of the support they had received. We spoke with the manager, two professionals visiting Watling Court and four staff at the time of our visit to the office. We also spoke with four staff over the telephone and a relative.

In addition we asked an Expert by Experience to write to people and then telephone a number of those people. Experts by Experience have personal experience of using similar services and were working on behalf of the Care Quality Commission to find out about the experiences and views of people using this service. We spoke with ten people who received care from this service. We have included the information they were given throughout this report.

The majority of people spoke very positively about the staff and felt that they fully supported their care needs. People said that all the staff spoke with them in a calm and respectful way and respected their privacy.

People spoken with told us that their care was personalised to their needs. People said their preferred names were always used.

People could not recall the detail of their care plan, but confirmed they, and sometimes their family, had been involved in discussions about their care, when the service had first started.

People felt that staff had received training and the majority felt they had the necessary skills in order to meet their needs.

People told us that they felt safe and if they had concerns they would speak with a family member or somebody from the office. Most people said they had not been asked for their views on the service provided. Some people thought they may have been asked informally, but no formal quality checks had taken place.