You are here

Archived: Caremark (Barnsley)

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 2 July 2013
Date of Publication: 18 July 2013
Inspection Report published 18 July 2013 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 2 July 2013, talked with people who use the service and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with eleven people who used the service and seven relatives of people who used Caremark to ask their views of the service they received. Their comments included; “very satisfied”, “they’re fantastic, they really are, they’ve been great”, “I am happy with them”, “no complaints at all, they’re brilliant”, “I’m satisfied with them” “they’ve been smashing” and “very pleased with the service.” No one told us that they were unhappy or displeased with the service. Another person said ”I feel that they really care about people.”

Everyone we spoke with said that care workers turned up to visits on time and stayed for the amount of the time they were scheduled to. Nobody we spoke with had had a missed visit. One person told us about a misunderstanding when they had cancelled a visit but the incorrect date had been recorded. This was resolved when the person called the office and “they sent someone out straightaway.”

Some of the people we spoke with were unable to recall signing a care plan but some said it was possible they had signed but had forgotten. Other people could recall specific meetings where their needs were discussed. People told us, “someone came out and went through everything with us” and “I signed something when we discussed what I needed and I was happy” and “when I first started I had a meeting, I can’t remember what I signed. I’m satisfied with them.” People we spoke with told us that they were satisfied with the support they received from their carer workers and from the other staff.

All of the people we spoke with said that they had a copy of their care plan which was kept in a file in their home. The two people we visited in their own homes had detailed care plans and information contained in a file which we saw.

People told us that supervisors would come out on occasions to check on things and ask if they were happy with their care. One person told us someone had been out “a few weeks ago, stayed to see how things were going and if we’re happy. I can call them anytime.” Everyone we spoke with said they felt the care they were receiving was suitable and that if they required any changes in their care they would inform one of the care workers or supervisors. They felt that any issues would be addressed appropriately.

During our inspection we reviewed five care records of people who used the service. In addition, we reviewed the care records of the two people whose homes we visited. We also spoke with the operations director, the manager and six care workers.

Care records included an individual needs assessment that contained detailed information about various aspects of the person’s life. This included areas such as likes and dislikes, medication, diet and mobility. There were individual care and support agreements in place which had been completed as a result of the initial needs assessments. We saw evidence of reviews of the care and support plans. Each care file included a list of potential areas of risk and when these had been identified as an area of concern, risk assessments had been completed. There was information recorded as to how to minimise the risk. There were also quality assurance check sheets and telephone monitoring forms in place. These recorded when a supervisor or manager had been to visit, or had had telephone contact with the person and whether the person had been satisfied with their care or had raised any issues.

We noticed that not all of the various documents in the care records had been signed by the person using the service. For example in one person’s file the individual care plan had been signed by the person using the service but a subsequent review and a prior needs assessment had not been. There was no reason given as to why not. In the other files we checked, there was other documentation which required signed agreement by the service user but was not signed. This meant that it could not always be evidenced that people had agreed to various aspects of their care