We inspected this service on 30 September 2016. This inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. There were 38 people in receipt of personal care support at the time of this inspection visit. Our last inspection was carried out in October 2013 and no breaches of regulations were found at that time.

The service had a registered 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 received their calls as agreed and from a regular staff team. Staff were knowledgeable about the support people needed to enable them to provide it in a safe way. Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and systems and processes were in place to protect people from the risk of harm. The provider had undertaken thorough recruitment checks to ensure the staff were suitable to support people. Medicines were managed safely and people were supported to take their medicine when needed. Equipment was in place to meet people’s diverse needs which enabled them to maintain choice and independence.

Staff received training to develop their skills and enable them to support the people they worked with. Staff were supported by the management team and received supervision to monitor their conduct and support their professional development. Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions. The delivery of care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and preferences.

People’s needs were assessed and care plans were developed with people, which directed staff how to support them in their preferred way. People were supported to maintain a diet that met their dietary requirements and preferences and to access healthcare services.

People knew how to complain and we saw when complaints were made these were responded to in a timely way. Staff felt listened to and were happy to raise concerns. People knew who the manager was and felt the service was well managed. The provider sought the opinions from people who used the service to bring about changes.

Quality monitoring checks were completed by the provider and manager and when needed action was taken to make improvements. The registered manager understood their responsibilities around registration with us.

Our inspection was discussed and arranged two days in advance. This was to ensure we had time to speak with staff, as well as people using the service.

There were 27 people using the service at the time of the inspection. We spoke with three people using the service or their relatives and a social worker by telephone. We spoke with two staff, the registered manager and the registered provider in person.

People received safe and appropriate care because their needs were assessed before care was delivered. This ensured the provider could meet people's individual needs.

We saw information to demonstrate how arrangements to seek people’s consent to care or treatment had been agreed. People had care records which included up to date information about how they wanted their care and support provided, and they understood the care and treatment choices available to them. One person said, “They are professional but friendly. They care if I'm not happy, I'm a person not a piece of paper and that's what I wanted.”

We saw records to confirm medicines were managed safely and effectively.

The staff received training that was appropriate for their individual needs and provided them with the information they needed to care for the people living in their own home.

There were quality monitoring systems in place and people were able to share their views and opinions about the service. People’s views were used to develop the service and maintain quality.

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We asked people to tell us what it was like to receive services from this home care agency as part of a targeted inspection programme of domiciliary care agencies with particular regard to how people's dignity was upheld and how they can make choices about their care. The inspection was led by a Care Quality Commission inspector who was supported by an 'expert-by-experience' who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

We visited three people in their own home as part of this review and spoke with them about their experiences of the support they have received. We spoke with seven people over the telephone who received a service from this agency.

People told us they were involved in planning their own care. They said that the care they received took account of how they wanted their care provided. People said that the agency staff listened to them when their needs altered and the staff made the agreed changes to their care.

People told us that the care workers treated them with respect and promoted their privacy and dignity. People liked their care workers and felt that they provided them with the support they needed.

We were told by people that they felt safe and protected. Care workers were trained to identify abuse and knew how to act when they felt someone may be harmed.

Care workers received training to provide people with the care they needed. People's care was regularly reviewed to make sure it continued to meet their needs.