Home Instead Senior Care is registered to provide personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 67 people with a range of personal care and support needs. The service also provided companionship and support to a number of other people. The staff who support people are known as ‘caregivers,’ we have called them this in the report and any other personnel are referred to as staff.

The inspection of this service took place on 28 29 30 June 2017 and was announced. There was a registered manager in post and they were present at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, registered managers 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 receiving care in their homes and they did not have any concerns about the care they received. Caregivers and office staff were knowledgeable in what constituted abuse and their responsibilities in reporting any concerns they had internally and externally to local safeguarding authorities.

Care plans were personalised to each individual and contained information to assist caregivers to provide care in a way they wished to receive care. The service operated a matching service where caregivers with similar interests, hobbies and personalities were matched to people, therefore people always received consistent care and support from the same caregivers. All people spoken with agreed they always received support from caregivers they knew well.

People who received care and support from Home instead Senior Care said they were very happy with the service provided. Everybody said the caregivers went above and beyond what was expected of them. The service had gone the 'extra mile' by considering the needs of people and their caregivers, by holding various events and competitions to further promote and develop positive relationships with people and their family members.

People and their relatives were actively encouraged to make their views known and were involved in making decisions about their care. Caregivers had a very good understanding about what was important to people and went to considerable lengths to ensure people's needs and wishes were met.

Senior staff were passionate about the agency and valued caregivers. They had a very good knowledge and understanding of people's care needs, interests and how they liked their care to be provided. They spoke warmly about the people and their families who used the service and it was clear from our visits that people liked and trusted them and were at ease in their presence.

A dementia café was held every month so caregivers, people that used the service and families could get together. The service worked within the local community to promote awareness of the effects of living with dementia. The service had two dementia friends’ champions that had been trained as volunteers by the Alzheimer’s society. Dementia friends’ champions are volunteers who encourage others to make a positive difference to people living with dementia in their community. They do this by giving them information about the personal impact of dementia, and what they can do to help. The champions had delivered sessions to all staff at the service and had plans to hold sessions for people that used the service and their families.

The provider had up to date complaints and whistleblowing policies and procedures which gave information for staff to follow and time scales to adhere to. This helped to assure people and caregivers that their concerns were taken seriously and addressed quickly.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure the safe recruitment of staff with sufficient numbers of staff employed to safely meet pe

Home Instead Senior Care is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. There were 67 people using the service when we visited. This inspection was announced, and was completed by one inspector on 12 November 2015. The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Staff knew what action to take to ensure that people were protected if they suspected they were at risk of abuse. There were sufficient numbers of staff to provide care to the people using the service.

Recruitment procedures ensured that only suitable staff were employed to work with people using the service. Risks to people’s health, wellbeing and safety had been assessed and actions had been taken to reduce identified risks. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people were supported and protected with the safe management of their medicines.

Staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This legislation sets out procedures where people do not have capacity and what guidelines must be followed to ensure that people’s freedoms are not unlawfully restricted.

People were supported with their nutritional needs, where appropriate, during the care visits they received.

Members of staff were trained to provide effective and safe care which met people’s individual needs and wishes. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. They were supported by the registered manager to maintain and develop their skills and knowledge through ongoing support and regular training. The staff were in contact with a range of health care professionals to ensure that care and support to people was well coordinated and appropriate.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected and their care and support was provided in a caring and patient way.

People received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. Changes in people’s needs were quickly identified and their care plans were amended when required. The service was flexible and responded very positively to people’s requests. People who used the service felt able to make requests and express their opinions and views. Proactive measures were in place to prevent people from becoming socially isolated. A complaints procedure was in place and complaints had been responded to, to the satisfaction of the complainant. People felt able to raise concerns with the staff at any time.

The provider had effective quality assurance processes and procedures in place to monitor the quality and safety of people’s care. People and their relatives were able to make suggestions in relation to the support and care provided.

During our inspection of the service on 10 October 2013, people told us they had been involved in planning their care and that staff had treated them with respect and dignity. One person said, “My carer is wonderful. They definitely meet all of my needs and do what I have asked.”

We looked at records which showed that people’s care and support needs had been assessed, documented and reviewed. They were personalised and gave staff clear guidance on how to meet people’s individual requirements. One person told us, “They [staff] are brilliant and I can’t praise them enough. They do everything I need and more. They are very helpful and nothing is too much trouble.”

People who used the service had been protected from the risk of abuse. Published guidance about safeguarding vulnerable people had been made available to staff and put into practice. A relative commented, “My [family member] trusts the staff, has confidence in them and has told me [they] always feel safe in their hands.”

Records showed that effective recruitment procedures were in place to ensure that staff were fit, able and properly trained to meet people's needs. This included carrying out appropriate checks before staff began work. Suitable arrangements were also in place to ensure staff had been appropriately supported to perform their roles.

We looked at records which showed that systems were in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of services provided.