This inspection took place on the 15 August 2017 and was announced.

Linda Deazle t/a D R & C Private Home Care is a domiciliary service providing personal care to people living in their own homes. The service caters for older people and younger adults with needs relating to dementia, learning disabilities, mental health, and physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection they were seven people using the service.

The service has a registered manager. This 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 told us they felt safe using the service because staff assisted them with their personal care in a safe way and relatives said staff looked after their family members safely and well. Staff knew how to minimise risk to people, for example, by reassuring them if they became distressed and checking on their physical well-being.

There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs. If people needed assistance to take their medicines staff provided this. The staff had a caring and compassionate approach to the people they supported. People said they usually had regular staff which helped them build relationships of trust with them.

People said the staff were well-trained and staff said they were satisfied with the training they’d received. Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act (2005) during their induction and sought people’s consent before providing them with care and support.

If people needed support with eating and drinking staff prepared food for them and/or prompted them to have their meals. Staff supported people with their healthcare needs and if they had concerns about a person’s health they alerted relatives and healthcare professionals as necessary.

People told us their calls were mostly on time and if staff were delayed for any reason they were informed of this. People had personalised care plans which set out how they wanted their care and support provided. Staff knew people’s aims, for example, to stay in their own homes, and supported people to achieve these.

People told us they thought the service was well-managed and they could contact the office staff when they needed to. The registered manager knew all the people using the service and was knowledgeable about their needs. Staff told us they were well-supported by the registered manager. The service had a caring culture and people were valued and given emotional support where necessary.

People had the opportunity to comment on the service through questionnaires. They told us if they had any concerns they would speak to the registered manager and were confident she would address these positively. The registered manager carried out monthly audits of people’s care packages to help ensure they received a good standard of care and support.

This inspection took place on 10 August 2016 and was announced. This meant we gave the provider 48 hours' notice of our visit because we needed to make sure someone would be in the office to meet with us.

Linda Deazle Agency provides personal care for people living in their own homes. On the day of the inspection the registered manager informed us that there were seven people receiving personal care from the service.

A registered manager was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The provider is the registered manager.

People and relatives we spoke with said they thought the agency ensured that people received safe personal care. Staff had been trained in safeguarding (protecting people from abuse) and staff understood their responsibilities in this area.

Risk assessments were not fully in place to protect people from risks to their health and welfare. Staff recruitment checks were not comprehensively in place to protect people from receiving personal care from unsuitable staff. People told us they had received personal care at agreed times to promote their health and welfare.

We saw that medicines were, in the main, supplied safely and on time, to protect people’s health needs though more information was needed to evidence this had always been carried out.

Staff had training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to be able to meet people's needs.

Staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to allow, as much as possible, people to have effective choice about how they lived their lives but did not have an awareness of their responsibility to assess people's mental capacity.

Staff had awareness of people's health care needs and were in a position to refer to health care professionals if needed though this had not always been carried out.

People and their relatives we spoke with told us that staff were friendly, kind, positive and caring.

People, or their relatives, were involved in making decisions about how they wanted their personal care to be provided.

Care plans were individual to the people using the service to ensure that people's individual needs could be met.

People or their relatives told us they would tell staff or management if they had any concerns and were confident any issues would be properly followed up.

People and their relatives were satisfied with how the service was run by the management. Staff felt they were fully supported in their work by management staff.

Management carried out audits and checks to try to ensure the service was meeting people's needs, though this system needed strengthening to identify issues to improve the quality of service to people.