Caremark Hammersmith and Fulham

Updated 26 April 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection was carried out as the provider had registered within the last 12 months. We were not aware of any allegations or incidents or concerns about this service. We had maintained contact with the provider to check how the service had developed since registration.

Prior to carrying out this inspection we asked the provider to complete a provider information return (PIR). This is a document which asks providers to identify what is working well and their plans to improve the service. We reviewed information we held about the service such as notifications of when people using the service had died. We spoke by telephone to two people using the service and two of their relatives.

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of this inspection. This is because the location provides a domiciliary care service; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. We visited the office on 20 March 2018 and reviewed records of care and support and medicines management relating to five people who used the service. We looked at records of recruitment, training and supervision of the provider’s six care workers, and policies and procedures. We spoke with the registered manager, company director and the franchiser’s regional director and three care workers.

Updated 26 April 2018

We carried out this announced inspection on 20 March 2018. This was the first inspection for this provider since they registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in March 2017.

“Charles Care Service” is also known as “Caremark Hammersmith and Fulham” and is a franchisee of Caremark. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. It provides a service to older adults and adults with a physical disability in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham.

Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to five people.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were measures in place to safeguard people from abuse. Care workers were aware of the possible signs that people were at risk and their responsibilities to report these. There were detailed and comprehensive systems in place to assess risks to people and mitigate these.

Medicines were safely managed and recorded, and records of these were checked by managers. This included assessing and documenting the level of support required for different medicines people took. Care workers received training in managing medicines and the registered manager carried out observations to make sure this was taking place safely. Care workers were recruited in a way which ensured people were suitable for their roles.

The service worked to meet people’s nutritional needs, including cooking food in a way which met people’s preferences. Care workers recorded people’s health conditions and supported people to access health services. The service acted promptly to get help for people when they were unwell.

People’s needs were assessed and used to draw up care plans. These were detailed about how people wanted to receive care and contained person centred information about people’s life stories and interests. The service worked to build positive relationships with people and to communicate well with people. We found that sometimes care plans were unclear about what needed to be done on particular visits, and recording was detailed about the support people had to eat and engage with staff, but wasn’t always clear on exactly what personal care was delivered and when. We have made a recommendation about this. People’s care was reviewed regularly to make sure it met their needs, and the registered manager carried out suitable monitoring to make sure people and their relatives remained happy with their care.

People told us that they were treated with kindness and respect and that they received care from consistent care workers. People had consented to their care, and when they were not able to do this the service assessed people’s capacity to make decisions and demonstrated they were providing care in people’s best interests. Care workers received suitable training and supervision to carry out their roles and told us they felt well supported by the registered manager.