We carried out an announced inspection of the service on 2 November 2017. Charlesworth 247 Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults living in their own houses and flats. Not everyone using Charlesworth 247 Limited 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. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. On the day of the inspection there were 20 people using the service who received ‘personal care’ and there was a registered manager in place.

At the last inspection, in October 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

People continued to feel safe and staff ensured that risks to their health and safety were reduced. There were systems in place to ensure that lessons were learned when things went wrong. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs in a timely manner and systems were in place to support people to take their medicines.

People were asked for their consent. However we found that where people lacked the capacity to make decisions appropriate steps were not taken to ensure their rights under the Mental Capacity Act were protected. We have made a recommendation about improving policies and procedures relating to the Mental Capacity Act.

Staff received relevant training and felt well supported. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain good health. People’s day to day health needs were met, some further improvements were required to ensure people received appropriate support with specific health conditions.

People continued to receive good care from staff that they had developed positive relationships with. Staff were caring and treated people with respect, kindness and dignity. Staff supported people to maximise their independence. People were involved in discussions and decisions as fully as possible in relation to how they were cared for and supported.

People received person-centred, responsive and flexible care from staff who had a good understanding of their current support needs. Care plans were in place which provided detailed information about the care people required. People knew how to make a complaint and there was a complaints procedure in place. People received compassionate, dignified care when they were coming toward the end of their lives.

The management team were committed to a vision of providing personalised care to local people and valued and supported staff to achieve this vision. There were robust quality monitoring procedures in place.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on 07 October 2015. Charlesworth 247 Limited is a small domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support to people in their own homes. On the day of our inspection twenty people were receiving personal care from the agency.

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. On the day of our inspection the registered manager assisted us with the inspection process.

People’s safety was protected whilst receiving care from staff. We found staff had received training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to care for people effectively and to ensure they understood their responsibilities in protecting people from abuse.

People received the support to safely manage their medicines. They also received the support to maintain a good food and fluid intake.

Risks to people’s health and safety were identified and people were supported by qualified staff.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

We found the registered provider was aware of this legislation and ensured it would be used correctly to protect people who were not able to make their own decisions about the care they received.

People were treated with kindness by staff and their dignity was respected. People were encouraged to be involved in the planning and reviewing of their care package to ensure their care was responsive to their changing needs. Staff helped people to maintain any hobbies and interests within their home and the community when requested.

People could make comments on the quality of the service and there were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.

The culture of the service was open and honest and the registered manager encouraged open communication with their staff. People felt able to make a complaint and felt any complaints would be taken seriously.

We used a number of methods to help us reach a judgement on the quality of service provision. These included undertaking telephone conversations with twenty per cent of people who used the agency. We also spoke with the management team and two care staff. We looked at records which included care plans and information about how the service was managed.

People told us they were provided with sufficient information from the manager and had been supported to make informed decisions about the suitability of the agency in meeting their assessed needs. They also told us that they were fully involved in decisions about their care packages.

People told us that they felt the care staff respected them and valued their opinions. One person told us, “I cannot fault them at all. They always involve and listen to what I have to say. At first I didn’t want anyone coming into my home but now I don’t think I could cope without them.” A relative of a person who used the agency told us, “I cannot fault them at all. It’s taken a load off my mind. They (care staff) are absolutely brilliant.”

People also told us the care staff were confident and competent in performing their duties. One person told us, “I think the service is well run. The staff are very good and I trust them. I have no concerns at all.” Another person told us, “Generally the staff are very good, I am very satisfied.”

We found that the agency had only been providing personal care services since July 2011. Although the agency only had seven people registered to receive this type of care package it was evident that the provider had initiated the necessary measures to develop a good service.

People told us they were very satisfied with the quality of the service provided by the agency. One person told us, “All the care staff are respectful. The care is wonderful and I am thrilled to bits with the service,” whilst another said,” They (care staff) are very good and very respectful.”

People told us that they felt that the registered manager, and care staff, respected their opinions and decisions and told us that their privacy and dignity was maintained.

People told us that they felt that all staff employed at the agency were suitably trained and performed their duties in a professional manner. One person told us, “The staff go above and beyond what I would expect,” whilst another said, “The care they provide is just wonderful.”

We found that people had been provided with the opportunity to comment on the quality of service provision and people also told us that they felt confident that any issue of concern would be addressed in a professional manner.