You are here

Archived: Caremark (East Riding)

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile


Inspection carried out on 24 March 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited Caremark following some issues that had been raised in previous inspections. The provider had undertaken a large volume of work to improve the services being offered including new levels of management, staff training and monitoring systems to ensure that the quality of service was good.

We found during our inspection that there had been improvements to the quality of reviews and care planning, that people were receiving care that was person centred. Staff were now receiving appropriate training and support to meet individual needs and there was a system to ensure that calls were not missed or late.

Paperwork had been improved, and staff training had been delivered around this area. There were now monitoring systems in place regarding the quality of documentation and there was a system in place for dealing with and responding to actions identified, complaints, investigations and care planning. The records documented all of this well.

Inspection carried out on 17 December 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

At the previous inspection in October 2013 non-compliance had been found in several areas of the service. The provider submitted information to the Care Quality Commission including an action plan and updates on a two weekly basis regarding the work completed.

We carried out a further inspection to assess the providers progress with achieving compliance. We sent questionnaires to people who used the service, interviewed people over the telephone and looked at the results of a large survey the provider had completed. We found people were generally satisfied with the support they received although common issues were raised through all the information gathered regarding call times, capability of staff and contact with office based staff. A large amount of reviews had been undertaken but the quality of these was inconsistent.

We found staff had undergone safeguarding training. Procedures followed when escalating issues had greatly improved. The management were recording, investigating and reporting any issues to the correct authorities when required.

There had been improvements in supervision and performance based monitoring with staff. All overdue training had been completed and a system was in place to ensure these areas continued to improve.

Work around quality assurance included implementation of new systems to improve monitoring and auditing. There were gaps in recording and some documentation required further improvement to ensure it was fit for purpose.

Inspection carried out on 1, 2 October 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

We brought forward an inspection of Caremark as a result of concerns raised with us. We found people were only satisfied with some elements of their care. Concerns were raised regarding ability of staff to carry out required tasks, missed calls and calls cut short. Care was not always being delivered in line with care plans. Robust risk assessments were not in place. Comments made to us included �Overall we are happy�, �The visits are cut short. This has caused us worry�, �Some carers are excellent, others are only okay�, �Sometimes carers don�t really know how to effectively support X. This has caused me some concern�.

There was a deficit in safeguarding training for staff and evidence that safeguarding concerns were not always recognised and responded to appropriately. Staffing levels were appropriate at the current time. Staff did not receive regular supervision and professional development and there was a shortfall in training for staff. This was not monitored effectively. Staff told us they did not always feel supported to carry out their roles effectively.

The service did not have effective quality assurance systems in place and there was a lack of evidence that feedback from service users and staff was acted upon appropriately. There were gaps in records including those for people who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 27 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people that used the service about their views of the care and support they received. The told us that they were generally satisfied with the 'calls' they received from care workers and supervisors and that they had made choices about who visited them and when. We found that people were well supported and had given their consent whenever possible.

People were protected from the risks of abuse and any suspected abuse situation was appropriately handled and referred to the local authority safeguarding team. We found that care and support staff understood their responsibilities in respect of infection control and demonstrated they followed safe practices.

People were supported by safely recruited staff that received supervision from their seniors. We found that the agency had an effective system in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service it provided and it took note of what people said.

People said, "I know that Caremark do their business properly. I must say they put themselves out to try to grant my wishes", "The carers provide good care and maintain a good routine for us" and "Staff minimise the indignity of it all and they do a good job of making sure we are comfortable.�

Inspection carried out on 19 July 2011

During a routine inspection

We spoke via telephone to six people who either receive or their husband or wife receive domiciliary care from this provider. All expressed overall satisfaction with the service.

Two people questioned the experience of some of the younger staff, one gentleman only wishes older staff to bathe him and one lady felt the staff member who attends to her needs cannot make a bed properly yet. All those asked however felt the staff appeared well trained and briefed.

One person felt the company�s internal communications could be better as three different members of staff turned up on the same day when the regular worker was not available.