Caremark (Oldham)

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
 

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they felt safe, valued and treated with dignity by staff who knew them well. One person said, “I feel safe and they are all lovely ladies. They maintain my dignity.” Feedback reflected care was delivered in ways that protected privacy and supported people to feel comfortable and reassured in their own homes.

Staff demonstrated compassion in their day to day interactions. People told us staff communicated calmly, respected personal space and provided support at a comfortable pace. Leaders reinforced expectations around dignity and respectful behaviour, and staff were encouraged to reflect on how their approach affected people’s experience of care.

Care plans gave clear guidance on how to support people respectfully and in line with their preferences. Leaders monitored practice through supervision and observation to ensure standards were maintained.
 

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People received care that reflected what mattered to them, including their routines, communication needs and personal choices. This helped people feel understood and supported in ways that respected their identity.

Staff took time to get to know people and adapted their approach to suit individual circumstances. Care plans included personalised guidance to help staff support people consistently, and leaders encouraged staff to reflect on how individual differences should shape care.

Care plans were reviewed and updated when people’s needs or preferences changed. Feedback from people and those close to them was used to inform how care was delivered.
 

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were encouraged to make everyday decisions about their routines, preferences and activities, and reported feeling involved in how support was provided. This helped people feel more confident and in control of their daily lives.

Staff understood the importance of promoting independence and used a least‑restrictive approach. Where people needed support, staff provided assistance in ways that encouraged participation rather than doing things for them. Leaders reinforced expectations that people’s choices should be respected, even when additional support or guidance was required to manage risks safely.

Records showed that care plans outlined how staff should support independence and decision making, taking account of people’s abilities and changing needs. Reviews were used to check that people remained involved in decisions about their care.
 

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People described feeling reassured that staff listened to them and took action when concerns arose. One person told us, “They never let us down.” This reflected feedback that people felt able to rely on staff to respond when they were unwell, distressed or at risk, and that support was provided when it was most needed.

Staff understood how to recognise and respond to urgent situations. When immediate needs were identified, staff escalated concerns appropriately and managers coordinated responses to ensure people received timely support. Leaders supported staff to act decisively and adjust care arrangements, so people’s needs were met without unnecessary delay.

Immediate concerns led to clear actions, such as changes to visit arrangements, escalation to health services or contact with families where appropriate. Follow up was recorded to ensure actions were effective.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff felt supported and valued and told us they could raise concerns and access help when they needed it. One staff member said, “Very often – sometimes during our visits. We also get emails about retrospective action found following our visits… I feel supported in my role.” This reflected a wider theme of staff feeling able to seek advice, receive feedback and raise concerns when required, which supported a stable workforce and continuity of care for people using the service.

Leaders took staff wellbeing seriously and responded to emotional, physical and work related pressures. Regular supervision provided opportunities for staff to reflect on their wellbeing, confidence and workload, and managers offered practical support when staff experienced stress, illness or personal difficulties. Staff were encouraged to access support, and adjustments were made where needed to help them continue working safely.

Wellbeing considerations were built into supervision, review and risk assessment processes. Leaders monitored staff support arrangements and followed up actions to ensure concerns were addressed.