Ainsworth Care is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of the inspection 62 people were supported by Ainsworth Care.

Not everyone using Ainsworth Care 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.

At our last inspection we rated the service good in safe, effective, responsive and well-led and outstanding in caring. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns.

This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

The registered manager is also the provider for this location.

The service was safe. Staff received training about safeguarding and were competent to report any concerns they had. People were supported to take their medicines safely by competent staff that were trained, and received competency checks to ensure best practice. There were enough staff to deliver people their support at a time they wanted. Safe recruitment practices were in place to employ suitable staff. Staff understood the importance of good infection control and wore appropriate equipment provided to keep people safe.

The service was effective. New staff completed induction and training to meet people’s needs effectively. Staff had access to regular supervision and meetings. The registered manager and staff worked in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) principles, staff understood the importance of promoting people’s choice. People care needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff supported people with their nutritional and hydration requirements.

The service was caring. Staff knew people well and staff cared for them in a compassionate way. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported people to maintain relationships. Staff delivered care that was supportive, kind and caring. People were involved in deciding how their care was provided.

The service was very responsive. People`s needs were assessed to ensure people received the support they required. People and relatives where appropriate, confirmed they were involved with their care reviews. People received support that promoted their independence and staff supported people with end of life care. People were supported to raise concerns and complaints if required. There was an electronic call monitoring system to ensure people received their calls at the appropriate time for them.

The service was well-led. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The registered manager was clear about their vision and values for the service and what they wanted to achieve. There were effective systems to monitor the quality of the service, identified issues were actioned. Regular surveys and quality checks were completed to ensure people’s views were sought.

We carried out an announced inspection on 06 January 2016 and made telephone calls to people who used the service and staff on 08 and 11 January 2016.

Ainsworth Care is a community based service providing home care support for people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, there were 65 people being supported by the service.

The service has a registered Manager in place. 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 risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised and how to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there were sufficient staff to support people safely. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and would seek people’s consent before they provided any care or support. Staff received supervision and support, and had been trained to meet people’s individual needs.

People were supported by caring and respectful staff who they felt knew them well. Staff also felt that they were given the opportunity to get to know the people they supported. Relatives we spoke with described the staff as very good and caring.

People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual, preferences, and choices. Staff supported people when required to attend health care visits such as GP appointments and hospital visits.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service. The provider also had effective quality monitoring processes in place to ensure that they were meeting the required standards of care.

As part of our inspection of this service we conducted telephone interviews with people who use the service and their relatives.

People told us they felt they were treated with respect and dignity by the visiting care staff and spoke highly of the service. One person said, "They are very good, very caring, I look forward to them coming - don't know what I'd do without them."

One person also told us that a manager from the service attended their home from time to time to check on the progress of their care plan and ask about any changes that needed to be made.

People told us that the care staff were punctual, always arrived when they said they would and that they were very satisfied with their care.

People using the service told us they were involved in their plan of care. One person said, "I can change or amend my care package whenever I want, I just have to say to one of the staff and they will arrange it."

We found that people also experienced a flexible approach to the delivery of their support. One person said "I ring them up if something out of the ordinary happens. For example, my relative had a hospital visit recently and normally they visit at 8am but they arranged a visit at 7am so we could be ready in time."

People said that the service delivered care according to their individual plan of care. For instance, a relative told us that carers visited three times every day according to the care plan in order to provide personal care and that the care plan was always followed in relation to using equipment to help to lift their relative.

Another person said "They came to see my relative before coming out of hospital so they knew exactly what was needed beforehand. The hoist and the bed were already there."

One person we spoke with said that they felt very safe in the hands of the care staff from the agency. Another person told us, "I have no concerns whatsoever; they are all very skilled and knowledgeable in what they do."

People using the service told us they felt the provider did a good job in ensuring the quality of the service was maintained.

We visited this community based service on 15 January and we also spoke with five people that used the service and four staff on 16 January 2014. One person told us "I find them very helpful and very good. The carers are polite and respectful. I can't praise them enough". Another person told us "The carers are very nice, very kind. I have no complaints at all". Another person told us "I am more than happy with the service and I would recommend them".

Staff told us they were very well supported and that any concerns they reported were actioned by the senior staff immediately.

We found that the care plans and associated records were up to date and reflective of people's needs and wishes.

People’s care plans gave clear guidance for staff to follow to support people with their eating and drinking to minimise the risks of malnutrition and dehydration.

We found that the service had robust systems in place for the administration of medication so that the risks of people not having their medication at the correct time were minimised.

We found that the service had robust recruitment procedures in place and that staff were provided with a range of training events to ensure they had the appropriate skills to support people in their own homes. The service had an effective complaints procedure in place for people to use if required.