You are here

Archived: Caremark (Redbridge)

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile


Inspection carried out on 16 January 2014

During a routine inspection

People were asked for their consent at all stages of their treatment including medication and it was documented. The registered manager advised that people could and did refuse and cancel care and support but that in such circumstances staff tried to find out why the refusal had happened and where possible they worked with people to find an alternative option. One member of staff said "I ask X what she would like to eat and whether she would like a bath."

People regularly had their needs assessed, monitored and reviewed for changes in their circumstances which promoted their welfare. We saw evidence that the manager carried out regular reviews and that they responded to changes in people's circumstances for example where someone had been observed to be more mobile a review was carried out with a view to reducing the care package.

Staff recruitment procedures were in place and safe recruitment practices including relevant checks were carried out to ensure staff were of a suitable character to work with people. We looked at staff rotas and saw that sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people’s needs.

Records were mainly accurate, we did note that care package start times needed to be up to date as care worker rotas had been updated, but care plans had not. We found records were easily located and were stored securely.

One person said "The carer writes everything she did down so I can read what she did."

Inspection carried out on 13 February 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

People who used the service told us they were treated with respect. Care workers told us they were respectful towards people and maintained their dignity when they delivered personal care to them.

We found people's care was planned and delivered in a way that met their personal needs. People were given an initial assessment before they received care from the agency. There was documentary evidence people were risk assessed to ensure their safety and welfare. Risk assessments were undertaken for the environment, moving and handling and medication.

The provider had a safeguarding vulnerable adults policy in place. We found care workers had undertaken safeguarding adults training and were knowledgeable about the different types of abuse and aware of the different signs they may encounter. Care workers knew they should report their concerns.

Care workers were supported in their roles. We found documentary evidence care workers had undertaken training relevant to their roles. There was evidence care workers received regular supervisions from their supervisors at least every three months. However we found care workers had not had a regular appraisal.

We asked for and received a summary of complaints people had made and the providers response. We saw complaints were recorded appropriately and fully investigated with a response made promptly to the complainant.

Inspection carried out on 20 February 2012

During a routine inspection

“I am very happy with this girl (care worker). She's got a gift. The compatibility and continuity provided are most important”. (Comment from the relative of a person using the service).

“Things are running very smoothly. Excellent, absolutely marvellous. She's a very pleasant lady”. (Comment from a person using the service).

“I have no complaints whatsoever. X is very efficient, tell her something once and she's got it”. (Comment from person using the service).