We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caremark (Chelmsford & Uttlesford) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Caremark (Chelmsford & Uttlesford), you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Caremark (Chelmsford & Uttlesford) is a domiciliary care agency providing care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is to help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
At the time of inspection, the service was providing care to 52 people however only 46 people were receiving personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives told us they felt safe using the service and were confident that any concerns raised would be dealt with appropriately.
People appreciated being visited where possible by the same staff. If there was going to be unexpected staff changes or late calls, people were informed.
The computerised care plan was comprehensive and provided clear guidance for staff. People and relatives told us they were involved in the planning of their care which was reviewed regularly to ensure the care continued to meet their needs.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service this practice.
During the pandemic some people’s needs had changed and the service supported the additional activities such as shopping and collecting medicines from the chemist. The provider recognised loneliness and isolation as a concern, and the service used technology to enable people to stay in touch with their relatives.
Staff spoke with compassion when talking about their role and people using the service. People told us staff were kind and caring and that staff promoted their dignity, independence and safety when carrying out their care.
The service had a safe recruitment and induction process in place. Staff were positive about the training they had received and spoke highly of the management team saying they were supportive and approachable.
The provider and registered manager acknowledged the challenges of the pandemic and told us how they had adapted during that time to ensure the continuation of care provision for people using the service, supporting families and staff. The quality management oversight was conducted through audits, visits by the registered manager, telephone calls, surveys and staff supervision. People told us the communication with the service was good.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (report published 16 April 2019)
Why we inspected
This was a planned pilot virtual inspection. The report was created as part of a pilot which looked at new and innovative ways of fulfilling CQC’s regulatory obligations and responding to risk in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. This was conducted with the consent of the provider. Unless the report says otherwise, we obtained the information in it without visiting the Provider.
The pilot inspection considered the key questions of safe and well-led and gives a rating for those key questions. Only parts of the effective, caring and responsive key questions were considered, and therefore the ratings for these key questions are those awarded at the last inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Caremark (Chelmsford & Uttlesford) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ There had been a number of changes to the way the service had been managed. A new manager had recently been appointed following the previous registered manager’s resignation.
¿ Team meetings were not taking place with care staff. However regular meetings were held with office and senior staff.
¿ People and staff told us that communication between themselves and the office could be improved when changes were made.
¿ Some people had experienced missed or late visits and staff told us their rotas changed frequently, which made it harder to develop relationships with people. Despite these arrangements, people spoke positively about the staff that supported them and told us the staff were kind and caring.
¿ There were some instances where we had not always been notified when safeguarding incidents had occurred.
¿ People told us they were safe. The service had effective safeguarding arrangements in place to protect people from harm and abuse.
¿ Quality assurance arrangements enabled the management team to monitor the quality of the service provided to people. These systems covered a range of areas related to the running of the service. The registered provider was introducing a new electronic system to assist with the monitoring of visits to improve the service people received.
¿ People told us they were treated with dignity and respect. People and their relatives were positive about the staff and told us they had a caring attitude towards them.
¿ Staff had a good understanding and knowledge of people’s needs and the care to be delivered. People’s care and support needs were documented, and suitable arrangements were in place to manage risk and to ensure people received their medication in the right way.
¿ An induction was provided, and staff received appropriate training. Staff received regular supervision and appraisals of their work.
¿ The service ensured they worked collaboratively with others and people were supported to access healthcare services when needed.
¿ People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Rating at last inspection: This service was last rated Good. (1 September 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Caremark (Chelmsford & Uttlesford) provides personal care to people who live in their own homes in order for them to maintain their independence.
At the time of our inspection the provider confirmed they were providing personal care to 62 people.
There was not a registered manager in post. The service had recently recruited a new manager who would be going through the registration process. 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.
Staff had a good understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report abuse and were confident in using them. People had risk assessments in place to guide staff to support people safely within their homes, and enable people to be as independent as possible.
We saw that there was a sufficient amount of staff employed within the service which meant that staffing levels were adequate to meet people's current needs. People confirmed to us that they saw the same staff consistently and their calls were not missed.
The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service.
Staff all confirmed that they had a thorough induction into the service and that on-going training was provided to ensure they had the skills, knowledge and support they needed to perform their roles.
People told us they were happy in the way that they were supported with medicines. We saw records that showed us medicines were administered safely and on time. Medication record audits regularly took place to keep track on the quality and pick up on any mistakes.
Staff told us they were well supported by the management team and senior team, and had regular one to one supervisions, both formally and informally through meetings with management, spot checks and observations.
People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met.
People were able to choose the food and drink they wanted and staff supported people with this. Staff were able to support people with making and preparing food when required, and staff promoted healthy choices to the people they were working with.
People were offered support to access health appointments when they need the support. People’s health was monitored by staff when required and recorded.
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. People felt that they were able to develop positive relationships with staff members that they saw consistently.
People were involved in their own care planning and were able to contribute to the way in which they were supported.
The service had a complaints procedure in place to ensure that people and their families were able to provide feedback about their care and to help the service make improvements where required.
The people we spoke with knew how to use it and were confident that they would be responded to in a prompt manner.
Quality monitoring systems and processes were used effectively to drive future improvement and identify where action was needed