We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caremark Cheltenham and Tewkesbury 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 Cheltenham and Tewkesbury, you can give feedback on this service.
Caremark Cheltenham and Tewkesbury is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. Not everyone using Caremark Cheltenham and Tewkesbury receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. There were 33 people receiving the regulated activity of ‘personal care’ at the time of the inspection.
There was no registered manager in post at the service. 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The service had recruited a manager who was in the process of registering with CQC.
This was the first inspection of the service and it has been rated ‘Good’ overall.
People received safe care and treatment. Staff had been trained in safeguarding and had a good understanding of safeguarding policies and procedures. The administration and management of medicines was safe. There were sufficient numbers of staff working at the service. There was a robust recruitment process to ensure suitable staff were recruited.
Risk assessments were updated to ensure people were supported in a safe manner and risks were minimised. Where people had suffered an accident, themes and trends had been analysed, and action had been taken to ensure people were safe and plans put in place to minimise the risk of re-occurrence.
Staff had received training appropriate to their role. People were supported to access health professionals when required. They could choose what they liked to eat and drink and were supported on a regular basis to participate in meaningful activities.
People were supported in an individualised way that encouraged them to be as independent as possible. People were given information about the service in ways they wanted to and could understand.
People and their relatives were positive about the care and support they received. They told us staff were caring and kind. We observed staff supporting people in a caring and patient way. Staff knew people they supported well and could describe what they liked to do and how they liked to be supported.
The service was responsive to people’s needs. Care plans were person centred to guide staff to provide consistent, high quality care and support. Daily records were detailed and provided evidence of person centred care. Where required, people were supported to make decisions about end of life care which met their individual needs and preferences.
The service was well led. People, staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Quality assurance checks were in place and identified actions to improve the service. The registered manager sought feedback from people and their relatives to continually improve the service.