We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caremark (Plymouth) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Caremark (Plymouth), you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People were truly respected and valued as individuals, by an exceptional and distinctive service.
People consistently told us how they were treated with exceptional kindness, compassion and respect. We received overwhelmingly positive feedback on how staff were supportive and went the extra mile to get care just right for people. One person told us, “All the staff are exceptional; the care
they give is second to none. They are of the highest standard. I feel totally safe and cherished in their care”.
The providers values of compassion, integrity and professionalism were strongly imbedded within the leadership, governance and culture of the service. All staff showed a love and passion for
people, keeping them at the heart of the service and in charge of their own care. One member of
staff told us, "I came into care, because I wanted to make people feel good every day, I love the
people I go to see".
The provider promoted an open and fair culture and was responsive and innovative to changes in the health and social care sector to ensure people’s care was delivered in line with best practice.
There were positive, respectful working relationships with external professionals. There was a passion for continuous learning, improvement and sustainability. The service had received a large number of awards both internally and from stakeholders, in recognition of delivering continuous high-quality care and support for people.
People were kept safe and protected from avoidable harm and abuse.
People received good personalised care and support, and had their human rights protected.
More information is in Detailed Findings below.
Rating at last inspection: Good. (published 07 October 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule for those services rated Outstanding.
Caremark (Plymouth) is a franchise of the Caremark Group which has 84 offices in the UK and nine offices overseas (Ireland and Malta). Caremark (Plymouth) provides personal care in people’s homes to adults within Plymouth and surrounding rural areas. On the day of the inspection Caremark (Plymouth) was providing personal care support to 141 older people including those with physical disabilities, autism, sensory impairments, mental health needs and people living with dementia.
The service 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 were protected from avoidable harm and abuse because staff knew what action to take if they suspected someone was being abused mistreated or neglected. The registered manger had a good understanding of local safeguarding procedures and had worked in collaboration with the local authority in the past, when safeguarding alerts had been raised.
People had risk assessments in place to help ensure they were protected and kept safe. The registered manager was taking steps to review people’s care records to ensure risk assessments were in place relating to people’s healthcare needs. Staff were protected by a lone working policy and the provider had an emergency contingency plan in place, to help in the event of adverse weather or staffing difficulties.
People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to keep them safe and meet their needs. Staff were recruited safely, to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People told us, overall staff arrived on time, but some had experienced delays. The registered provider told us this was an area they were continually trying to improve by listening to people’s feedback. Staff said they had adequate travelling time, and told us if they ever felt that they did not, they were able to raise this and action would be taken to make improvements. People were protected by the spread of infection and people told us staff followed infection control practices, and that their homes were always left clean and tidy. People’s medicines were managed safely, staff received training and people had care plans in place to provide guidance and direction as to how they would like their medicines to be administered.
People received care from staff who had undertaken training to be able to meet their needs. People were positive about the staff’s ability to meet their needs. Staff were complimentary of the training and support they received. The registered manager and deputy manager were passionate about ensuring staff were trained to a high standard. People’s consent to their care and support was sought. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported with their nutrition and if there were concerns that a person was not eating and drinking enough, action was taken. People were supported to access healthcare services to maintain their health and wellbeing.
People told us they received support from kind and caring staff. People were supported by a small group of staff which helped to ensure continuity of care and develop personal relationships. Staff spoke fondly of the people they supported and told us they liked to go the extra mile. People were involved in decisions relating to their care and support and people told us their privacy and dignity was respected. People were cared for at the end of their life, and staff showed compassion for people’s families.
People had a pre-assessment before joining the agency to help ensure the service could meet their needs. People received personalised care, and had care plans in place to provide guidance and direction to staff. This helped to ensure the support they received reflected their wishes and preferences. People’s care plans were reviewed to ensure they were reflective of their up to date care needs. People’s independence was promoted and staff took opportunities to encourage people to do as much for themselves as possible. People’s complaints were listened to, investigated and used to improve the service.
There was a strong management team, who were passionate about delivering a quality service. Staff felt motivated and well supported. People were asked for their views about the service. There was an open, inclusive and empowering culture within the service. There were systems and process in place so the registered manager could assess the ongoing quality of the service. The managers were open and honest, they responded professionally and promptly to the Commission and external agencies when required.
People who used this service and their relatives told us care staff were "friendly", "always polite", "always on time", "know what they are doing", and [the management team] respond in a positive manner".
We found care workers arrived at the times they were expected. People were confident they were involved in their care, and their privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
We found care workers referred to people's care plans and involved people in their care. They contacted health and social care services when this was needed. Care plans and records were regularly reviewed and updated. This meant people received care and support that met their needs.
People told us care workers were competent. The care workers told us they received training and supervision from the management team which enabled them to provide appropriate care to people using this service. This meant people received effective, safe and person centred care that met their needs.
We found people benefited from safe, quality care and support because there were effective systems in place to monitor and manage risks to people's health, welfare and safety.