You are here

Archived: Cambridge Care Company Also known as Haverill

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 December 2013
Date of Publication: 9 January 2014
Inspection Report published 09 January 2014 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 5 December 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care. The agency assessed people before providing a service to them to ensure they were able to meet their needs. Assessments from other agencies were also on file. Once the agency had agreed to provide a service to someone all the necessary paperwork was put in place which included a plan of care and relevant risk assessments for tasks the person required support with, such as medication. The paperwork clearly explained what the person needed support with and how staff should provide it. The documentation told us what the person was able to do for themselves and also where provided information about the person’s life history. This gave staff an insight into the person’s situation and background which would help them support the person appropriately. Records showed us that people had given their consent to the support being provided to them and people’s needs were kept under review to make sure the support provided was both acceptable and relevant to the person’s needs.

We looked at two care plans in the office and for five people we visited. People were aware of their care plans and who they should contact if the service fell short of their expectations. Daily care notes showed us what support had been provided and these were reviewed by the manager to ensure that people’s needs were being met and staff were keeping appropriate records.

The agency were able to meet people’s needs flexibly and everyone we spoke with told us they had been able to change the time of their support or request additional visits if required. One person had regular support and this was going to be extended to include an overnight stay to enable their carer to have a break. The agency were providing support to a number of people being discharged from hospital who needed intensive support and assessment for a set period of time. After this period the agency could continue with the care package all be it providing reduced support or pass the care over to an agency, in which they worked closely with to ensure the person’s needs would continue to be met. This meant the service worked flexibly to meet people’s individual needs and tailored the service to support them.

We spoke with people about the service they received and they all told us that they had regular carers attending to them so could rely on them to know how to meet their needs. They told us that the service was provided mostly at the agreed times and they trusted the staff to let them know if they were running late. People told us that carers became like ‘family members’ and they ‘trusted’ and felt ‘safe with carers.’

The provider may wish to notes that several people told us they sometimes had trouble contacting the office out of hours. Staff told us this was because the person on call might also be covering care hours so were not able to answer the phone. This meant we could not be assured that there were always appropriate arrangements in place to cover emergencies. The provider may also wish to note that some people we spoke with did not have appropriate security arrangements in place which made them vulnerable to crime. Some staff told us of their own vulnerability when travelling late at night to isolated places. Some precautions like alarms and torches had been issued to staff but not all staff felt safe.