Caremark (East Riding)

Updated 12 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 27, 28 March and 6 April 2018 and was announced. It included visits to the provider’s office location, attendance at a focus group and visiting people in their own homes. We gave the service three weeks’ notice because we requested the provider arrange a focus group so we could speak with people who used the service.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service, such as information we had received from the local authority and notifications we had received from the registered provider. Notifications are documents the registered provider submits to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to inform us of important events that happen in the service.

The inspection was carried out by three adult social care inspectors. On the first day of inspection two adult social care inspectors visited the agency office. They spoke with the registered manager, training manager, two senior field care supervisors and reviewed documentation in relation to the running of the service such as care records and policies and procedures. One adult social care inspector visited eight people in their own homes and spoke with four care support workers and one field care supervisor.

On day two of the inspection we took part in a customer forum with nine people who use the service. We spoke with one senior care coordinator, two care coordinators and five care support workers.

On day three of the inspection we telephoned people who received a service and some relatives to gain their views of the service provided to them. In total we spoke with 32 people who used the service and nine relatives.

Updated 12 May 2018

This inspection took place on 27, 28 March and 6 April 2018. At the time of the inspection there were over 600 people receiving a service of around 7200 hours and 15400 visits each week. Around 370 care support workers were employed by the service who received support from field care supervisors. In addition to this, care coordinators, training manager, training administrator, administrators, person centred care administrator, community liaison officer, compliance manager and the registered manager were based at the agency office.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses, flats and specialist housing. It provides a service to older adults, people with; dementia, mental health, learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder or people who misuse drugs and alcohol.

This service also provides care to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service had a manager in place who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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.

Systems were in place for the safe management and administration of medicines.

The service had followed their policies and procedures when recruiting new staff however, recording of some information needed to be more robust.

We saw there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to meet people's individual needs, however, additional cover arrangements when people left, were on holiday or off sick required improvement to ensure consistency for people.

Staff received training on safeguarding adults from abuse and understood their responsibilities in respect of protecting people from the risk of harm. Most staff had basic understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People expressed satisfaction with the support they received from staff. The feedback we received confirmed people had positive relationships with staff and felt they genuinely cared about them.

Staff told us they were well supported by their supervisors and the management team. They received a structured induction programme when they were new in post and regular refresher training. This included training on the administration of medicines.

There was a record of any accidents or incidents involving both people who received a service and staff. This allowed the provider to monitor whether any patterns were emerging or if any improvements to staff practice were required.

There was a complaints policy and procedure made available to people who received a service and their relatives. Complaints records showed any complaints received had been investigated and people had been informed of the outcome.

The service sought feedback from people who received a service. We saw feedback was mostly positive and action was being taken to address any concerns.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.