Caremark Peterborough

Updated 21 September 2021

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats and specialist housing.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service four days’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection. This was as well as ensuring people could consent to us speaking with them.

Inspection activity started on 2 September 2021 and ended on 6 September 2021. We visited the office location on 6 September 2021.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since registration. This included events reported to us such as deaths. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with three people who used the service and two people's relatives. We spoke with five staff including the registered manager and the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We received feedback from a social worker.

We reviewed a range of records. We looked at two people’s care records and one staff file in relation to recruitment and supervision. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including quality monitoring audits, incidents, staff training and supervision planning records and medicines administration records.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. This included training and supervision records, analysis of incidents and compliments.

Updated 21 September 2021

About the service

Caremark Peterborough is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people living in their own houses or flats. It provides a service to older adults some of who are living with dementia, people with mental health needs and people with a physical disability. At the time of the inspection five people were supported by the service.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Trained and knowledgeable staff helped protect people from harm, or the risk of this, as staff knew how to identify and report any potential abuse or risks to people. One person told us, “I have four care visits every day and [staff] are always on time and stay until, everything is done.” Risks to people were identified and managed well. Competent staff administered and managed people’s medicines as well as promoting people’s independence to do this themselves.

Enough safely recruited staff with appropriate skills helped ensure people’s needs were met. Systems and staff training about infection prevention and control (IPC) meant any risks for spreading infections were minimised. Lessons’ were learned and shared amongst the staff team when things went wrong.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. One person said “[Staff] always ask me what I want. I then choose, even if they don’t agree, they respect my decisions.”

People’s care and support needs were centred on the person. People communicated effectively as staff had a good understanding of treating every person equally well. People’s care was compassionate, respectful, and staff were promoted independence at every opportunity. People had privacy when needed and staff upheld people’s confidentiality.

Concerns were acted on before they became a complaint and compliments were used to identify what worked well; this helped ensure good practise was sustained. Skilled, compassionate staff ensured people’s end of life care was dignified.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities. Staff were supported in their role to be open and honest by promoting the provider’s values. People had a say in how the service was run and managed. Quality assurance procedure and oversight of the service was effective in driving sustained improvements. The provider worked well with others involved in people’s care to help ensure their care was joined up.

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 24 June 2020 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the date of registration with CQC.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.