Caremark Liverpool

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We assessed 5 quality statements in the safe key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Though the assessment of these areas, our rating for the key question remains good. People were kept safe and protected from harm. Staff understood the course of action to take if someone disclosed an allegation of abuse. Most people felt appropriate action was taken when they raised concerns with the office. There was enough staff assigned to peoples calls and staff were recruited safely. Risk assessments contained enough information to help keep people safe. Staff knew how to support people and people told us they had been involved in their care and support plans. People were supported to take their medicines safely, and lessons had been learnt from previous shortfalls in this area.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us Caremark would take appropriate action to concerns regarding their care. Comments included, “I did raise an issue once, but I remember they sorted it the next day.” And "Yes they are listening, never been an issue." Another person told us, "Yes they've learned." This was in reference to changes of staff the person requested. However, we received mixed feedback from relatives which included they did not always feel their concern had been resolved and felt this could improve.

Staff told us said they felt well supported by the registered manager. There were opportunities for further training in response to any shortfalls identified through lessons learned, to support improvement of care to people. Comments included, “We have a care app, and any messages are always communicated through that.” And “We get re-trained” and “The manager is very supportive.”

Processes were in place to ensure lessons were learned and any previous actions were embedded into future practice. Incidents and accidents were documented and analysed. An example of this included, further medicines training had been put into place in response to an increase in the number of medication errors. The registered manager also introduced new audits and checks of medication administration records (MARs) to support improvements in this area.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us they felt safe. One person told us, “Yes I absolutely feel safe.” Another person we spoke with described how they felt the organisation safeguarded them because they always gave them a list of who was coming. One person described how staff ensure they are left with enough food and drinks between calls. We were told, “The staff are wonderful and worry about me eating and drinking. They make sure I am left with enough.” Everyone told us staff were approachable and they would feel assured speaking to them if they had any worries or concerns.

Staff were consistent with the procedure to follow if they felt someone was being harmed or abused. This included escalating these concerns to the registered manager or reporting the concerns directly to the local authority or police. One staff member said, “if I saw a bruise I would go to my manager, speak with above or police if they did nothing.” Staff confirmed they had been trained in safeguarding, and told us Caremark ensures additional training is undertaken when needed. The provider told us “We are constantly wanting to develop our staff.” The registered manager confirmed they kept themselves up to date with any changes in legislation.

Clear systems and approaches were in place to manage and investigate concerns, incidents and accidents that occurred, this was supported by policy. Evaluation of information was completed by the registered manager, who then recorded actions and lessons learned. This included escalating information both internally and externally. The registered manager ensured outcomes were shared with staff to also support any lessons learned through supervision, team meetings and other digital tools with staff.

People told us they had been involved in the completion of their risk assessments and understood what paperwork was in their home and why it was there. One person said, “Risk assessments are completed with me with my permission.” Another person explained how they felt involved in their care planning because the office always called them and made sure everything was going okay for them. The registered manager had ensured risk assessments were completed with the consent of the person involved. Where this was not possible, a best interest process had been followed.

Staff told us an app on their phone allowed them to access people's care plans and risk assessments. This ensured they had easy access to updated plans if people's care changed, and risk assessments had been updated. One staff member told us, “Yes, it is on the app I access this regularly.” Adding, “Everything about the person is on there, including allergies and what they like and don’t like.”

Risk assessments had been undertaken by the registered manager to ensure people were supported safely by staff. For example, we observed one person had a risk assessment in place for diabetes, which explained the actions staff were expected to take if the person experienced a high or low blood sugar incident. Another person had a risk assessment in place around their decision making. This included choices they could make themselves safely, and other choices where they may require more support due to the level of risk. The risk assessments viewed had been signed by people themselves if able, or by their family member if they were legally able to do this on their behalf. Risk assessments were reviewed every six months or more often when there was a change in the persons needs.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us staff arrived on care calls at expected times, there was enough staff who knew them well to provide consistent care. One person said “There is definitely enough staff- I get a list of names which tells me who is coming and when.” Another person described how at times the person coming to their call could change due to sickness. However, they were always informed if there was a change to the rota.

Staff confirmed they completed medication training, which included am competency assessment completed by a senior member of staff. A medication app on their phones provided staff with access to information regarding people’s medicines and PRN (as and when required medicines). Staff felt safe and equipment to support people in this area.

Staff were recruited and selected safely, this included people’s right to work and sponsorship checks. Training planners showed staff had completed all mandatory training subjects and had undergone yearly refreshers or refreshers when needed in response to additional reflective learning. Staff had been supervised and appraised in line with the organisation's policy and procedure.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Overall people told us relatives provided support with medicines. Where Caremark care staff provided support in this area, people gave positive feedback. We were told, “Staff help me remember to take my medication and made sure I have access to water.” Relatives told us that where recent medicines errors had been made the service had made improvements, but the provider needed to embed this into practice for consistency.

Staff confirmed they completed medication training, which included an competency assessment completed with a senior member of staff. A medication app on work phones provided staff with access to information regarding people’s medicines and PRN (as and when required medicines). Staff felt safe and had the right equipment to support people in this area.

There were processes in place to ensure medicine was given out safely and in accordance with people’s assessed needs. Medication audits took place, as well as competency checks in line with the provider's policy. Where there were issues identified Caremark took action to address areas of poor practice, identify lessons learned and re-trained staff where required to support improvements.