The inspection took place on 30 May 2018. This was an announced inspection.

Head Office (Futures Care) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. The service will be referred to as Futures Care throughout this report. Not everyone using Futures Care 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.

At the time of our inspection seven people were using the service.

There was a registered manager working at Futures Care. They told us they had been working for the service for the last year. 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.’

This is the first inspection of Futures Care and we rated the service ‘Good’ overall.

The service was safe. People’s medicines were managed safely. Risk assessments were implemented and contained clear guidelines for staff on how to support people and minimise risk.. People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had received training around this. There were sufficient numbers of staff supporting people. There were safe and effective recruitment systems in place.

The service provided to people was effective in meeting their needs. Staff had the relevant skills and had received appropriate training to enable them to support people. Staff received good support from management through regular supervisions and appraisals. People were encouraged to make day to day decisions about their life. For more complex decisions and where people did not have the capacity to consent, the staff had acted in accordance with legal requirements. Where required, people and relevant professionals were involved in planning their nutritional support. Where required, people were supported to access a variety of healthcare professionals and appointments were arranged.

The service was caring. People and their relatives spoke positively about the staff. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of respect and dignity. People’s preferences in relation to their cultural or religious backgrounds were clearly recorded. Equal opportunities and diversity were promoted throughout the service.

The service was responsive to people’s needs. People and their families were provided with opportunities to express their needs, wishes and preferences regarding how they lived their daily lives. People’s needs were regularly assessed and care plans provided guidance to staff on how people were to be supported. The planning of people’s care, treatment and support was personalised to reflect people’s preferences and personalities. People were receiving end of life care which was in accordance with their personal preferences. People and relatives told us they had been involved in developing their end of life care plans. The service had a process of responding to complaints.

The service was well-led. Quality assurance checks and audits were completed and these ensured the service was effective in safely meeting the needs of people. Staff, people and their relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. There was a positive culture within the service and the vision and values of the service were clear. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the vision and values of the service.