Caremark Hounslow

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. The last rating for this key question was requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider ensured people received person-centred care. People using the service and their relatives told us care reflected their preferences and needs. Their comments included, “[Care worker] is always on the same page as us and goes over and above to help”, “The staff are very adaptable and work with [person] to help [them] be as independent as possible” and “The service is effective, and we work well with them.”

Staff supported people to develop their own personal goals. These included learning new skills and trying new things. They supported some people to access the internet safely. They supported others to develop social skills and regulate their own emotions.

The provider supported people to access community services when needed. They supported some people to attend healthcare appointments and some to access colleges and schools. The registered manager explained how they assessed risks in the community and worked with external professionals to support people. One relative explained, “[The agency] has been very helpful in supporting [person] with their education. [Care worker] helps [person] go out and supports [them] to learn letters.” Another relative explained, “[Person] goes to college with the carer.”

The agency ensured people had information they needed about their care, about the service and about accessing other services. People had copies of their care plans, procedures and who to contact if they needed services. Staff supported people who did not use words to communicate to make sure they had the information they needed. Relatives confirmed this. Comments from relatives included, “[Care worker] helps with [person’s] speech and emotional intelligence. [Care worker] is good for [person]” and “I have a care plan and this has the tasks, the carers explain what they are doing. [Person] does not use words, and the staff use positive touch and reassure [them].”

Staff explained they used photographs, objects and gestures to help provide information. One staff member said, “We follow the signs and expressions of the client.”

The registered manager explained that care plans and other documents were available in different languages and easy to read formats.

At our last assessment, we found the provider’s systems for managing complaints were not always robust. We made a recommendation in relation to this. At this assessment, we found improvements had been made.

The provider had a complaints procedure. People using the service and their relatives were aware of this. People told us they felt able to raise concerns and these would be responded to appropriately. The provider had investigated complaints and concerns. They had taken action to make improvements because of these and checked back with the complainant that they were happy. Following all complaints, the provider arranged additional telephone calls and visits to help make sure people continued to be happy with the outcome.

People and their relatives told us they felt there were opportunities to speak up. They had regular telephone calls and face to face meetings with managers and senior staff. They also had opportunities to complete satisfaction surveys about their experiences. Some of their comments included, “I am aware of the processes for speaking up and would not hesitate to do this”, “They always answer the phone, and we are greeted by name" and “I speak with the managers, and they are very helpful.”

The provider ensured people could access the service and other services if needed. They supported people to overcome barriers, by making regular contact and asking if they needed any additional support. The agency offices were open during the week and weekends which meant staff could access managers and supplies when needed. There was a 24 hour on-call system for people using the service, staff and other stakeholders to access support or information when they needed.

Staff found creative ways to communicate with people to help them express their feelings in a positive way. For example, they had supported a young person who found being with other people and in unfamiliar places overwhelming. There were incidents in the community which placed the person and others at risk of harm. The staff worked with the person’s family to better understand their communication needs. They created a person-centred way of communicating using appropriate language and clear information. They also used pictures and objects of reference. As a result, the person had been supported to try new things and take part in a range of safe and fun activities outside of their home.

The provider had policies and procedures regarding equality, diversity and respecting human rights. Training in these areas was part of staff inductions. The agency did not discriminate and worked with people to provide sensitive care which reflected their characteristics and needs.

People were supported with planning for the future when needed. The agency provided personalised care which included support for people at the end of their lives if needed.