Caremark West Berkshire and Reading is a domiciliary care agency providing support to people living in their own home within the community. The agency’s office is located near the centre of Reading, Berkshire. At the time of the inspection they were providing personal care for approximately 120 people.

At the last inspection the service was rated GOOD. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good:

People continued to receive safe care from the service. Staff were recruited safely and there were sufficient numbers of staff to support people. Medicines were managed safely by staff who had received appropriate training. Risk assessments were completed to enable people receive care with a minimum of risk to themselves or the care staff.

People continued to receive effective care from staff who were trained and supported to have the skills and knowledge to effectively support them. People’s healthcare needs were monitored and advice was sought from healthcare professionals when appropriate. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible, the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service remained caring and people reported staff were kind and patient. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity and treated them with respect. People told us they could make decisions about their care.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care plans were personalised and identified the preferences of each individual. Complaints were investigated in line with the provider’s policy and used to provide learning opportunities for staff.

The service continued to be well-led. The registered manager promoted an open and transparent culture and wanted to work towards improving the service. People’s views were sought and the quality of the service was monitored. Action was taken when issues were identified and the registered manager worked with staff to develop and improve the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on 17 March 2015 and was announced. Caremark (West Berkshire and Reading) is a domiciliary care service and at the time of the inspection was providing personal care for 107 people living in their own homes.

At the time of the inspection there was a manager in post. 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.

People told us that staff treated them with kindness, dignity and compassion. People also said they were respected and involved in decisions about their care. Most people told us they had been asked for their views on the service. However, some people felt there could be more surveys carried out and two people said they had been told they would receive a visit from the manager to ask their views but this had not happened.

People using the service told us they were happy with the service they received from Caremark (West Berkshire and Reading) and felt safe using the service. There were systems in place to manage risks to people and staff. Staff were aware of how to keep people safe by reporting concerns promptly through procedures they understood well. Information and guidance was available for them to use if they had any concerns.

People’s needs were reviewed regularly and up to date information was communicated to staff to ensure they could provide appropriate care. Staff contacted healthcare professionals in a timely manner if there were concerns about a person’s wellbeing.

The registered manager had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to gaining consent before providing support and care. New staff received an induction in line with the common induction standards (CIS), training and spent time with experienced members of staff before working alone with people. Staff received refresher training in topics the provider considered essential on a regular basis.

The provider’s recruitment procedures were robust and there was a system to ensure people received their medicines appropriately. The quality of the service was monitored by the registered manager and the service was audited by the provider’s head office. Staff were aware of how to deal with emergency situations and the provider had plans in place to deal with emergencies. This was to ensure people would be cared for in the event of foreseeable emergencies.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and provider and said they were listened to if they raised concerns. Staff felt there was an open culture in the service and they were comfortable to approach the registered manager or provider for advice and guidance. Complaints were addressed and action taken according to the provider’s policy.

We spoke with seven people who used the service and a family member. People we spoke with told us that they were generally happy with the service they received. One person we spoke with told us “we get on very well and always have a chat, they will do anything for me”. Another person said “I can’t fault them, they are all very good”.

We spoke with four staff members and the provider. Staff told us that they followed care plans which they felt contained adequate information. Care plans we looked at had been reviewed and were up to date.

Appropriate recruitment checks were carried out and recorded. New staff completed an induction and attended core training.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider had taken action to respond appropriately when it was suspected that abuse had occurred or was at risk of occurring. People we spoke with said they felt safe using the service and they had confidence in the care workers and their abilities.

There was an effective complaints system. Comments and complaints were listened to and acted on.

The provider had an effective system in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service people received.