Caremark Warwick

CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is to help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do provide personal care, staff also consider any wider social care provided. All most all care calls ranged from 30-minute duration to 1 hour. At the time of our visit, no one received care, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

People said staff arrived on time and stayed for the allocated time and their care was provided to them by a reliable and consistency team. Staffing rotas and call schedules were completed with consistency in mind. Staff told us this helped them get to know people well and their individual routines.

People were safe because staff were recruited safely. Staff and the provider knew how to keep people safe and protected from abusive practice. Systems to learn lessons when things went wrong helped to drive improvements.

People said staff were kind, caring, gentle and always willing to do what was needed and expected of them. People were cared for by staff who attended training relevant to their roles. Assessments were completed before care was provided. This helped to ensure staff had the relevant skills and knowledge to meet a person's needs before a care package was begun. Staff followed infection control procedures in line with national guidance for reducing the spread of COVID-19.

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.

People's plans of care were detailed for staff to provide safe care. The registered manager was in the process of updating care plans with important information. Staff's knowledge of how to support people was consistent with people's care records and what people told us.

Risks related to people's care were recorded and reviewed. There were instructions for staff to follow to

manage those identified risks, however for some risks, such as risks related to specialist equipment needed to be more personalised. The registered manager assured us this would be addressed, conversations with staff showed they knew how to manage risk. In some examples, intervention by a GP or occupational therapist had been sought to help keep people safe.

Audits and quality checks were completed. People, relatives and staff provided their feedback which helped ensure the quality of service continued to improve. People and staff were complimentary of the management team. Relatives we spoke with confirmed the quality of care was good and they felt well informed and engaged in how their family members were supported. Relatives said the management team was approachable and responsive.