Caremark (Cheshire North East)

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. At the time of the inspection, 56 people were receiving support with personal care.

People's experience of the service and what we found: The provider undertook some quality assurance audits and checks, however they had not identified all the issues we found during the inspection. Records were not always sufficiently robust. This related to aspects of risk management, medicines records and to demonstrate full compliance with the MCA. Systems to improve the provider's oversight of training and staff supervisions were being further developed.

Where necessary staff reported safeguarding concerns to the local authority. However, whilst the provider was aware of the need to notify CQC about certain incidents and events, they had not fully understood all aspects of this requirement. We have made a recommendation about this.

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. However, staff had not always followed the systems/policies in place. This related to records for capacity assessments and best interest decisions. We have made a recommendation about this.

The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff, who had been recruited safely. Overall, people were supported to receive their medicines safely and risks were managed. However, the electronic recording system in relation to medicines needed to be further adapted and some records needed to be more in-depth about actions being taken. The provider was addressing this.

People told us they felt safe and were complimentary about the care provision. People's needs were met in a person centred way and the care was flexible. Systems were in place to protect people from abuse or avoidable harm.

People's needs were assessed and care and support was delivered in line with current standards to achieve effective outcomes. People had been included in discussions about their care. Staff worked well with other agencies and acted on any changes in people's needs.

There was a positive and open culture at the service, with good communication. The provider had already devised a development plan to drive ongoing improvements in the quality of the care. The provider worked

in partnership with others and people's views and feedback were sought.

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