The inspection took place on 27 June 2017 and was announced. This was the first inspection for this service.

Dignity in Life offer a range of domiciliary care services, including cooking, cleaning and personal care.

There was a manager in place at the service who was going through the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission. 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 who used the service told us they felt safe. Staff files we looked at evidenced a robust recruitment procedure and staff we spoke with told us there were enough staff to cover the work. All staff had undertaken training in safeguarding and staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding issues and were confident to report any concerns.

Individual risk assessments were in place and these were updated on a regular basis. Accidents and incidents were recorded and followed up with actions such as contacting other professionals or making a referral to another agency.

There was an appropriate medicines policy in place and all staff had undertaken medicines training and their competency was assessed and regularly checked. There was a clear protocol for reporting any medicines errors.

There was a thorough induction programme in place, which included mandatory training. Refresher training and extra courses were on-going. Supervisions and appraisals had been undertaken regularly.

Care files included a range of personal and health information, documenting people’s support requirements. Nutritional information was included and where an issue was identified, for example when weight loss was being monitored, food and fluid charts were completed. Special diets, such as diabetic diet, were highlighted within the records.

The service was working within the legal requirements of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff were aware of the principles of the MCA and about how to contribute to making decisions in people’s best interests.

People who used the service told us they were happy with the support and with the staff. Staff we spoke with were able to tell us how ensured people’s dignity and privacy were respected.

We saw from the care records we looked at that equality and diversity was respected. The service tried to match up people who used the service with workers who had the appropriate skills and knowledge, for example relating to language and culture. People’s religious and spiritual beliefs were documented and respected in terms of care delivery and support.

There was evidence in the care files of the involvement of people who used the service and their families in care planning and reviews. There was a service user handbook given out to prospective users of the service and families.

We saw that care files were person-centred and included personal preferences, likes, dislikes and interests. This helped staff members deliver care in a person-centred and individual way. Some people received an outreach service to support them to activities and events.

The service had an appropriate complaints policy and procedure. Complaints were logged and followed up appropriately.

There was a manager in place at the service who was going through the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission.

People who used the service and staff members told us the management were supportive and approachable. Staff meetings took place on a regular basis and gave staff a forum to raise concerns and make suggestions.

A number of audits were undertaken regularly and there were regular visits to people who used the service to check on their welfare. Satisfaction surveys were given out for people to complete and their views and opinions we