Home Instead Senior Care provides personal care services to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection Home Instead Senior Care were providing personal care to 61 people in their own homes.

At the last inspection on 26 October 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service was again rated Good.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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 felt that the service provided was very good and that they felt safe and secure. The manager and staff demonstrated they understood their roles and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding people from abuse and knew how to report concerns.

Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to help ensure that all staff were suitably qualified and experienced. Arrangements were in place to ensure there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available at all times to meet people’s individual needs.

Staff obtained people’s consent before providing personal care and support, which they did in a kind and compassionate way.

Staff had developed positive and caring relationships with the people they cared for. People were involved in the planning, delivery and reviews of the care and support provided.

Care was provided in a way that promoted people’s dignity and respected their privacy. People received personalised care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences.

People who used the service told us the service was flexible and able to meet their needs. People's care and support needs were kept under review to help ensure that they continued to be met.

People who used the service felt able to raise any concerns and were confident that they would be managed appropriately. Staff said that they were fully supported by the registered manager and owner.

People's views about the service provision were gathered regularly to help the registered manager assure themselves that the service they provided was safe and was meeting people's needs.

There was a culture of openness and inclusion at the service. People who used the service and staff spoke positively about the registered manager and owner and said the service was well run.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.

We spoke with four people and the relative of one person who used the service. People told us that the care workers always asked them for permission before any care was provided. People were very happy with the service provided. One person told us, "The current carers are the best I've ever had." Another person said, "They're absolutely marvellous as far as I'm concerned."

We spoke with four care workers. They told us that they felt supported by the management of the service. Two care workers told us that the service was supporting them to obtain relevant qualifications in social care. We looked at the personal record of four care workers. We saw that these included written reports of the regular meetings they had with the manager.

Information about how to make a complaint was included in the service's 'Statement of Purpose'. The manager told us that this was read out to people at the time of the initial assessment for service and again on the first call to a person who started to receive service.

We looked at the personal record of four care workers. We saw that these included written reports of the regular meetings they had with the manager.

People told us that they were very happy with the quality of the service they received. Two people told us, "I have no complaints at all."

We spoke with two people who received a service from this agency. We also received information from relatives of two other people who received a service from Home Instead Senior Care. All were very satisfied with the care they or their relatives experienced. A person told us that the service they received was, “Absolutely amazing,” and a relative told us they, “Couldn’t recommend them highly enough.”

People said they felt the manager and staff listened to them and provided care that consistently met their needs. We saw that people’s needs were assessed prior to care being provided and regularly thereafter so that care was provided safely.

There were satisfactory recruitment procedures in place that ensured only suitable people were employed to provide care. People told us they liked the staff members who provided their care and support and felt they were all confident and competent in their roles. We saw a variety of certificates that showed staff had received training in various important areas including moving and handling and the management of medicines.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and maintain the quality of the service. People told us that the manager regularly asked for their views. They said they were confident that should an issue arise the manager would address this appropriately.

We carried out an inspection of Home Instead Welwyn on 27 and 28 October 2015. This was an announced inspection where we gave the provider 24 hours’ notice because we needed to ensure someone would be available to speak with us.

Home Instead provides personal care and support to people who live in their own homes. At the time of the inspection Home Instead was supporting 35 people.

We last inspected the service on 5 December 2013 and found the provider was meeting the required standards at that time.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 told us they received safe care, which was reliable and consistent. The service had sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, and people were given the time they needed to ensure their care needs were met.

People were protected from avoidable harm and staff knew what to do if they suspected abuse. Risks to people were assessed and risk management plans were in place.

Staff had the skills, training and support they needed to deliver effective care. All of the staff we spoke with told us they were well supported by each other and the management team.

The service was working to the principles of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 and care staff supported people to make their own choices about their care.

The owner had robust recruitment processes which helped to ensure that staff members employed to support people were fit to do so. Staff knew their roles and responsibilities and were knowledgeable about the risks of abuse and reporting procedures.

People were supported with a range of services which enabled them to continue to live in their own homes safely. People and relatives told us they had been involved in the assessment and planning of the care and support provided and that the service responded to changes in people’s needs.

All the care staff who dealt with people’s medicines had received medicine management training and were clear about their role in managing medicines safely.

People told us the service was well managed and they felt they could approach the manager and owner with any concern and they would be dealt with. Care staff told us they enjoyed working for the service, they received good training and felt supported.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided to help ensure people received safe, effective, care and support.