The inspection took place on 19 July 2018. The inspection was announced.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. The Carers Relief Service is a care agency that provides care services to people in their own homes. Not everyone using the service receives a regulated activity of 'personal care.' CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’. At the time of inspection, one person was receiving personal care at home.

At our last inspection on 09 February 2016, we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and 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.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Carers Relief Service is a registered charity managed by a trustee committee of carers, professionals and volunteers. The service currently operates in the Medway, Swale and Maidstone areas. The care was delivered to give relatives and carers respite. The registered manager had managed the service since 2001 and the service had consistently met the fundamental standards and regulations.

People continued to be supported to make their own decisions about their care or had a family member who helped them.

People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People consented to their care. Staff were caring and compassionate. Staff were trusted and respected people's privacy and dignity.

Risks associated with people's care and support were managed safely. Staff followed infection control guidance to minimise cross infection risks. Suitable arrangements were in place in relation to the safe administration and recording of medicines.

The provider's policies, staff training and staff work practices were designed to keep people safe from abuse or harm.

Experienced and skilled staff were deployed in response to people’s assessed needs and choices. Staff performance and development continued to be supported through supervision meetings which took place on a regular basis.

People's care plans continued to contain enough information about their personal preferences and focussed on individual needs.

People's feedback was sought and used to improve the care provided. There was a complaints policy in place and people or their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

The registered manager consistently worked with other organisations to design and deliver appropriate care.

The provider had a set of values the staff understood and included protecting people's human rights. The registered manager regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care to ensure standards were met and maintained.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

We inspected the service on the 9 February 2016. This inspection was unannounced.

Carers Relief Service provides services for younger adults and older persons, including people with learning, autism and physical disabilities. They provide personal care to people in their own home and also support people in the community. The service provides care for people in the Medway and Swale area. There were three people receiving support to meet their personal care and community support needs. All other people only received support to access the community, with no personal care involved so they do not fall within this services registration.

The service had a registered manager. 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 were protected against the risk of abuse. All staff were trained and recognised the signs of abuse or neglect and what to look out for. Both the registered manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities to report any concerns and were confident in doing so.

Risk assessments were detailed and gave staff guidance about any action staff needed to take to make sure people were protected from harm.

Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the registered manager. Staff had received training relevant to their roles. Staff had the opportunity to discuss their performance during one to one supervision meetings and had an annual appraisal that discussed their future development and possible further vocational training.

There were suitable numbers of staff on shift to meet people’s needs. People’s planned care was allocated to members of staff at appropriate times.

People were supported to access the community regularly. People were also supported and helped to maintain their health and to access health services if they needed them.

People told us staff were kind, caring and communicated well with them. People’s information was treated confidentially. Paper records were stored securely in locked filing cabinets.

Procedures, training and guidance in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was in place which included steps that staff should take to comply with legal requirements.

People’s view and experiences were sought through review meetings and through surveys. People’s views about the service they received were positive.

People were supported to be as independent as possible. People told us that the service was well run. Staff were positive about the support they received from the registered manager. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to.

Audit systems were in place to ensure that care and support met people’s needs.

Communication between staff within the service was good. They were made aware of significant events and any changes in people’s support needs.

re.

We visited Carers Relief domiciliary agency office, reviewed documents pertaining to people’s care and support. We spoke with one person who used the service and two parents of people cared for. The agency had three people who received personal care and support. All spoken with were very pleased with the service received.

The comments included; “They are excellent, they have never let me down and the staff are so caring, they do all that is asked and more”, “X is always pleased to see the staff”. They confirmed that the communication had remained very good at the agency. They told us they were kept informed about who would be visiting and were updated when this changed.

We found that staff had received training to make sure they had the skills they needed to care for the people who received the service.

The staff had received medication training and were able to prompt and administer medication safely although discussion took place about how this was recorded.

The agency had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the care and support they provided.

This was a small domiciliary agency with two service users, we spoke to 1 person who used the service and one family member. Both were very pleased with the service they received. The comments included; “the staff are lovely and helped me with shopping and going out”, “the staff treat us with respect”, ”staff let me make my own choices” and “staff are there to help and they are always very kind.”

We were told that the communication had been very good at the agency. People were kept informed about who would be visiting and were updated when this changed. The staff were punctual and they were always reliable.

We found the staff had received training and had a good understanding of how to safeguard adults in their care.

We found the staff had been recruited in a way that made sure that vulnerable adults would be protected. New staff had undertaken induction training to make sure they had the skills and knowledge to provide care to people with differing needs.

The agency had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the care and support they provided.