Caremark Brent

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People received personalised care and support that met their individual needs. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and wishes. Information was accessible and people's views were listened to and acted on. Records were updated to help ensure they reflected people’s changing needs. People’s equality and diversity needs were respected and met.

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.

People’s needs were met in a personalised way. Relatives were involved in care planning and reviews of their care. Relatives said the service was responsive to people’s needs.

Staff knew the people they were caring for and treated them as individuals. Staff were knowledgeable about what people liked and what their preferences were and how best to meet them. People had different communication needs and therefore staff tailored communication methods to each individual as appropriate.

Relatives told us their family members received continuity of care. This was an important aspect of people’s care as they had a real opportunity to get to know care staff.

We did not receive feedback from staff about this aspect of the service.

We did not receive feedback from external partners.

The provider's processes included liaising with other professionals where appropriate and provided continuity of care.

Relatives told us they had the information they needed. They knew who the manager was, and who to contact if needed.

The manager also advised that they held meetings with relatives where they were able to review people’s care and provide necessary information.

Systems were in place to hold confidential information, and the provider had systems to ensure compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (UK GDPR). Service records were kept locked away or were password protected on electronic devices. This helped to ensure people’s private and sensitive information was only shared with authorised persons.

Staff took the time to communicate with people. The majority of relatives we spoke with told us care staff understood people’s needs and were able to effectively communicate with people.

Staff and the manager told us they communicated with people and spoke with relatives to obtain feedback. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and took appropriate action to help ensure people received effective care and support. Staff received support and training to help them enhance communication with people.

People’s communication needs were documented in their care plan. This provided information about people’s individual needs and included information about how the person communicates and details of how to communicate with them. There was an appropriate complaints procedure.

Relatives told us staff could access health care support for people when needed.

Management was able to describe how they supported people with reasonable adjustments.

We did not receive feedback from external partners.

A system was in place to support people to access health care providers. Information was readily available to people, relatives and staff as required.

Relatives were complimentary about the agency. A relative said, “The current manager is superb. Nothing is too much trouble and there is always an immediate response or resolution if there is a problem.” Feedback indicated that communication between management, staff and relatives was positive. Management encouraged feedback from all parties and told relatives to openly raise issues if needed. People's equality needs were met. People's cultural and religious needs were met. For example, some people’s cultural wishes involved not wearing shoes in their homes, care staff respected this and wore shoe covers.

Staff were complimentary about working at the agency and said they felt valued by their colleagues and management. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They were aware of the importance of treating people equally regardless of their abilities, their background or their lifestyle. Staff asked people and relatives how they wanted to be supported. Relatives told us staff listened and valued people’s individuality and preferences.

Procedures regarding equality and diversity were in place. Staff had completed training to understand how to meet people's diverse needs. Where appropriate, care planning documents included information about people’s religious and cultural needs. Management carried out monitoring checks of the quality of the service provided through telephone calls.

At the time of the assessment, the service did not provide end of life care to people.

The manager confirmed that at the time of the assessment no one was being supported with end-of-life care or in receipt of palliative care. The director explained that they had previously provided end of life support to a person and staff providing support to this individual had completed the relevant training. There was also an emphasis on delivering person centred care based on the individual’s wishes. For example, care staff sang bhajans [religious prayers] for this person at their request.

An end-of-life policy was in place.