We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caremark (Mid Sussex and Crawley) 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 (Mid Sussex and Crawley), you can give feedback on this service.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. It provides a service to people with varying levels of need, including older people, younger adults, people living with dementia and mental health, eating disorders, substance misuse problems, learning disability, physical disability and sensory impairment.
There was a registered manager at this service. 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. The registered manager was also one of two registered providers for this service.
Caremark (Mid Sussex and Crawley) provides personal care services to people living in the Haywards Heath, Burgess Hill and Crawley areas. Companionship and domestic support can also be provided. Not everyone using this Caremark service received 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. At the time of the inspection, 147 people received a service from the agency.
This agency provided an extremely personalised and innovative service to people living in their own homes in the community. As well as the more traditional care at home service provided to people, the local social services department had funded a six month pilot for a new responsive model of care called ‘Patch Care’. This new model of care had been created and designed by the Caremark Franchise and taken to the local social services department to fund the pilot project. This service provided an innovative and exciting new model of care with a more tailored approach to care than most traditional care at home services. People and staff included within the new pilot enjoyed the benefits of a more flexible service that responded to individual needs at variable times when people really needed and wanted the support. People were actively engaged and involved in shaping the service provided by this agency and the new ‘Patch Care’ pilot involved people and aimed to tackle the issue of loneliness and social isolation for people.
The agency was engaged very proactively and positively with community organisations in support of people and their relatives living with Parkinson’s Disease. On World Parkinson’s Day the agency worked closely with local Parkinson’s Society representatives to organise a community event which was attended by over 25 people and their relatives, as well as staff and the management of the agency. We also attended this event and observed the positive benefits for people.
People were supported by a very caring staff and management team who demonstrated kindness and compassion towards people, their relatives and their colleagues alike. Staff were reported to have helped people to maintain their independence and also supported a person to regain their confidence to walk again with staff support, dedication and positive encouragement. There was a very evident person-centred culture throughout the agency with staff who demonstrated real passion and dedication towards people and towards each other. People and their relatives were without exception extremely positive and happy with the service they received and people told us that staff were very caring and that they were treated with dignity and respect. A relative told us, "The care they [staff] give is 100% and more. They do a fantastic job."
People were safeguarded from abuse and harm with safe systems and practices. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and received training to enable to do so effectively. People received a personalised service with their needs and risks being assessed by competent staff. Corrective actions were taken to minimise and reduce risks as required. There were enough staff to meet the needs of people safely. Technology was used effectively to schedule visits to people in their homes and people received copies of the staff rota so they knew which staff would visit them.
Staff knew people very well and people received care from staff who had undertaken training to be able to meet their individual needs and preferences, which included having enough to eat and drink. People and their appropriate representatives were involved in the care they received. Healthcare was accessed by staff in a timely manner when people required access to healthcare professionals. Staff were recruited safely. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive ways possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People received medicines in a safe way from suitably trained and competent staff who were regularly supervised and observed in practice which ensured their continued safety to manage medicines safely. Red medicines folders held within people’s homes provided a clear system for those who received medicines support form staff to have this need met safely. Staff protected people from the risk of infections by using personal protective equipment. Staff had a good supply of protective equipment which they could obtain from the main office, as they needed it. People told us that staff always used the protective equipment appropriately.
At the time of this inspection, the agency did not actively support people at the end of their lives. Records for people demonstrated that their wishes or best interests decisions had been recorded which ensured that people would receive appropriate staff support and intervention at the end of their lives.
Systems and processes were used effectively to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint should they need to. Complaints were addressed and handled appropriately and promptly to the satisfaction of the complainant.
The service was exceptionally well managed with an open, approachable, passionate and friendly management team who were all dedicated to working towards providing positives outcomes or people and their relatives as well providing compassionate and team support to their colleagues. The management team were very proactive in their approach and continuously strived to better the service by working with external agencies and commissioners and by maintaining their knowledge of industry best practice initiatives through attendance and involvement at external events. The registered providers, one of whom was also the registered manager for this service had been awarded ‘The Mark of Excellence’ from the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Caremark franchise group, in January 2018. This award stands for excellence demonstrated across the board, which included the quality of service, recruitment and support of staff. The CEO stated that the service’s registered providers had demonstrated that, “with a can-do and highly positive attitude they [registered providers] have built a care team who share their vision. They are champions for the care sector at large”. There were clear aims and objectives of the service with an understanding and management attention to the overall strategy and running of the business.
The inspection took place on the 27 October 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hour’s notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We wanted to be sure that someone would be in to speak with us.
Caremark (Mid Sussex and Crawley) is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support services for a range of people living in their own homes. These included older people, people living with dementia and people with a physical disability. At the time of our inspection 162 people were receiving a care service.
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.
The experiences of people were positive. People told us they felt safe and staff were kind and the care they received was good. One person told us “Oh yes I feel safe, I look forward to seeing the staff”.
There were good systems and processes in place to keep people safe. Assessments of risk had been undertaken and there were instructions for staff on what action to take in order to mitigate them. Staff knew how to recognise the potential signs of abuse and what action to take to keep people safe. The registered manager made sure there was enough staff at all times to meet people’s needs. When the provider employed new staff at the service they followed safe recruitment practices.
Assessments were undertaken to identify people’s support needs and care plans were developed outlining how these needs were to be met. We found that care plans were detailed which enabled staff to provide the individual care people needed. People told us they were involved in the care plans and were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.
The provider had arrangements in place for the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to receive their medicine when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had assistance to access to health care services when needed.
The service considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. Staff observed the key principles in their day to day work checking with people that they were happy for them to undertake care tasks before they proceeded.
People were supported at mealtimes to access food and drink of their choice and were supported to undertake activities away from their home.
Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff received regular training to ensure they had up to date information to undertake their roles and responsibilities.
There were clear lines of accountability. The service had good leadership and direction from the registered manager. Staff felt fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. For example staff were offered to undertake additional training and development courses to increase their understanding of needs of people using the service.
Feedback was sought by the registered manager via surveys which were sent to people and their relatives. Survey results were positive and any issues identified acted upon. People and relatives we spoke with were aware of how to make a complaint and felt they would have no problem raising any issues. The provider responded to complaints in a timely manner with details of any action taken.
People told us that their care and support had been well managed. One person said "It's going very well. Staff are very good.". Another said "Staff are excellent, they do a very good job.' People told us that carers were punctual, and supported them in the way they wished to be supported. We saw that care plans showed that needs and risk assessments were in place which enabled care workers to support individuals in a safe and appropriate way.
Care staff had received training and support which had helped them deliver care and treatment to people safely and to an appropriate standard.
People felt they could approach the service if they had any concerns or complaints. They told us that the service took positive action when issues were raised.
There was evidence in the care plans that needs and risk assessments had been completed in detail, which enabled care workers to support individuals in a safe and appropriate way.
Records showed that there were robust recruitment procedures to make sure staff employed were fit to carry out their work. There was evidence in records and in talking to care staff that the training they received helped them deliver care and treatment to people safely and to an appropriate standard.
We found that the service had regularly assessed and managed risks relating to the health, welfare and safety of people receiving a service.