Archived: Caremark (West Norfolk)

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, relatives and staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

Risk assessments for care needs were completed and provided appropriate actions for the identified risk to be reduced. We found that records of care provided to people were kept and indicated guidance in care plans was followed.

People using the service said there were enough staff available to meet their needs. However, information from staff members, the manager and records shows that there are not always enough staff to cover periods of sickness or annual leave.

Is the service effective?

People told us that staff members helped them with everything they needed assistance with. They were satisfied with the care they received. Care records had improved and provided information about people's care needs and preferences. However, this required further work to tell staff what assistance people needed with washing and dressing and how their mental or physical health needs affected them.

Health needs were responded to and people had access to health care professionals if they needed this. Care records contained information about the health care professionals involved with people's care.

Is the service caring?

People said that staff members were polite and kind; they respected people's privacy and dignity, and involved them in their care. We observed that interactions between one person and a staff member and we found that the member of staff was patient and understanding of the person's individual needs. Staff members knew people's care needs and their personal preferences when we spoke with them.

Our observations also showed that staff members were respectful towards people using the service. People told us that staff were respectful and that their privacy was maintained.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that people's individual physical and mental support, care and treatment needs were not always assessed or properly planned for. Their individual choices and preferences regarding their support and care were valued and respected, although information was not available to staff about these.

Information about complaints was available and most people knew how to contact the service if they were not happy with any aspect of their care. Complaints were acknowledged and responded to quickly, although the service's systems were not always effective at receiving complaints.

Is the service well led?

The service had carried out a survey in January 2014 but the results had not been collated and actions had not been identified to improve or resolve any issues. There were other systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service provided, although the service had not analysed or taken any action to identify trends or themes.

Staff files demonstrated that appropriate checks, including Disclosure and Barring Service checks, were carried out before a person began work.

Staff we spoke with told us that they felt supported in their role, and that they were able to attend further training as appropriate.

Complaints and comments were taken into account by the manager when they reviewed the quality of the service.

Records relating to people who used the service and staff were not maintained and accurate.

We spoke to three people who used the service and two relatives who told us they were quite satisfied with the support and care provided. People we spoke with told us that they felt that they could speak to staff about the care they received and care and support was altered as needed.

We reviewed three office copies of people's care records which documented personal information, an individual care and support agreement and an individual needs assessment. Care was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

The provider had a robust system to manage medication safely and there was a policy in place for staff to follow.

We spoke with four staff members and reviewed five staff files. Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work.

People who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

The plans of care contained the information staff members needed to ensure that the health and safety of people was promoted.

People who used the service and their relatives told us that people received the care and support they needed and that staff were very kind.

The provider responded appropriately to any allegation of abuse and staff we spoke with showed us that they knew how to ensure that people were safe.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place and appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work.

The quality of care and support provided was monitored and people were asked for their views on the service they received.