Archived: Caremark (Leicester)

Updated 10 August 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 20 June 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Our expert-by-experience for this inspection had expertise in services for people with physical disabilities.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider returned the completed PIR.

We looked at the information we held about the service, which included 'notifications' of significant events that affect the health and safety of people who used the service. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that providers must tell us about. We also looked at other information sent to us from people who used the service, relatives of people who used the service and health and social care professionals.

We spoke with eight people using the service and two relatives whose family members used the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, care manager and a care co-ordinator.

We looked at the records of six people, which included their care plans, risk assessments and daily care records. We also looked at the recruitment files of five members of staff, training records, a range of policies and procedures, minutes of meetings and information relating to the quality assurance for the service.

Updated 10 August 2016

The inspection took place on 20 June 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in. This was the first inspection for the service since registration.

Caremark (Leicester) is a domiciliary care service providing care and support to people living in their own homes. The office is based in the city of Leicester and the service currently provides care and support to people living in Leicester and Leicestershire. At the time of our inspection there were 66 people using the service.

Caremark (Leicester) had a registered manager in post. 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 felt safe with the care staff and the support they received. Care staff were confident to report any concerns about people's safety, health or welfare to the care manager or to the relevant external agencies.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and support needs and in the development of their care plan. Potential risks to people's health had been assessed and guidance was recorded in the care plans for staff to refer to. We found that some risk assessments lacked sufficient detail to give staff the guidance they needed to keep people safe. We raised this with the care manager who told us they would review all risk assessments to ensure they were fit for purpose.

There were sufficient numbers of care staff employed who had undergone a robust recruitment process before they worked unsupervised with people who used the service.

People were prompted to take their medicines where their plan of care had identified that the person required support. We found people's medicines were managed well.

Care staff had received induction and training that equipped them to support people safely. Training records were reflective of the training staff had completed. All staff were supported through unannounced spot checks and observations of practice. Staff received support through regular supervision.

People made decisions about their care and support needs. Care staff sought consent before they supported people and respected people's choices and decisions.

People's plans of care reflected the support they required and, where appropriate, social support which helped to ensure people received effective care.

Care staff supported some people with their meals and drinks in order that they maintained a balanced diet. People were happy with the support they received with meal preparation, cooking and shopping where required.

Care staff supported people to liaise with health care professionals if there were any concerns about their health.

People were happy with the support they received. People had regular care staff who they had developed positive relationships with. People were complimentary about the care staff and found them to be kind and caring. Care staff understood how to maintain people's privacy and dignity whilst respecting their choice of lifestyle and promoting their independence.

Care staff were knowledgeable about the needs of people and took account of their preferences such as times, cultural and diverse needs. Care staff arrived on time and stayed for the agreed length of time in order to ensure they were safe and their needs were met.

People were aware of how to raise concerns. They were confident that any concerns raised would be responded to by the management team.

The provider sought people and relatives views about the service regularly. People were happy with how the service was managed.

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the service, which included checks on care staff delivering care and review of people's care. People had regular home visits carried out by the management team who checked on their well-being and also monitored the care and support provided by staff.