Our inspection of Assisted Lives took place on 3, 4 and 5 April 2017 and was announced in line with our domiciliary care methology. This was the first inspection since the service had registered. The service had recently changed hands and the registered manager was also the registered provider.

Assisted Lives is a domiciliary care agency located close to Bradford city centre which provides a range of services including personal care. At the time of our inspection the service was providing regulated activity of personal care to eight people.

There were sufficient staff deployed to support people who used the service in a safe manner. The service had recruitment systems in place which ensured people were supported by suitable care staff. People told us their relatives were supported by regular staff who understood their relative's care and support needs and stayed the appropriate length of time to offer effective care and support. Staff arrived on time, had received appropriate training to support them in their roles and were encouraged to develop their skills further through additional training and development. Staff spot checks and supervisions were in place.

People who used the service and their relatives felt safe with the care staff who supported them. Safeguarding procedures were in place. Staff understood how to keep people safe and had received safeguarding training which was up to date.

Risks to people's health and safety were assessed and plans of care put into place although some assessments for equipment such as bed safety rails needed to be documented.

Where people were supported with medicines such as prescribed creams these were mostly managed safely although 'as required' (PRN) protocols and processes needed to be put in place.

The service was acting within the framework of the Mental Capacity Act. People who used the service were given choices regarding their care and support and independence was promoted where possible. Documentation about best interest decisions needed to be put in place for areas such as bed safety rails or wheelchair belts.

Where the service was supporting people nutritionally, they were supported to consume a varied and healthy diet.

People's relatives told us staff were kind, caring and supportive and knew their relatives well, including what they liked, disliked and what their care needs were.

Care needs were assessed prior to service commencement and plans of care implemented. Care records and comprehensive daily plans were individualised and person centred. Staff knew people's care needs well.

People told us the service was well managed and the registered manager was approachable and helpful. Staff morale was good and there was a commitment to provide good quality and effective care and support.

Some audit systems were in place which the service was evolving as the service expanded. However, some potential risks identified could have been identified by more effective quality assurance systems.

People's opinions were sought through satisfaction questionnaires, regular telephone surveys and informal discussions. The registered manager was introducing staff meetings and spoke regularly with staff informally and through regular supervision.

Staff and people we spoke with said they would definitely recommend the service although some relatives commented that it was too early to comment with any authority.