Forever Good Care Ltd T/A Caremark Merton

Staff knew the types and signs of abuse and the action required to protect people from the risk of avoidable harm. Comments we received included, "[Person] feels safe with [staff]"; "Oh yes I do feel safe with the agency" and "Bruises, lack of food in the fridge, falls and an untidy house can be signs of abuse. I will report to the [registered] manager such things." Staff understood their responsibility to identify and report suspected abuse to keep people safe. Risk management plans enabled staff to provide care in a way that minimises harm to people.

People were supported to take their medicines safely. The provider followed safe recruitment practices including checks on new staff's suitability to provide care. Staff received support, training and supervisions to ensure they were appropriately skilled to meet people's needs.

People told us staff were kind and caring. Comments we received included, "[Staff] are respectful" and "Very kind and friendly." Staff provided care in a manner that respected people's privacy, dignity and confidentiality. Where possible, staff encouraged people to undertake tasks they were able to do for themselves and to make choices about their daily living.

People's needs were assessed and staff delivered care appropriate to them. People accessed healthcare services when required. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint about any aspect of their

care that fell short of the expected standards. The majority of people felt their concerns were resolved in a timely manner.

Checks and audits were undertaken on the quality of care and shortfalls were addressed. People, staff and relatives were encouraged to share their views of the service. They told us the registered manager considered their ideas when making improvements to the service. People benefitted from the close partnership working of the provider with other agencies and health and social care professionals.

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.

This was an 'inspection using remote technology'. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.