Ohio Home Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the service provided support to 41 people living in boroughs in west and north London.

This inspection took place on 29 August, 6 September and 21 October 2016. We gave the provider two days’ notice that we would be carrying out an inspection. This was because the service provides personal care to people living in their own homes and we needed to ensure that key staff would be available. This was the first inspection of this service since it’s registration in January 2014. The provider was previously inspected at its former location in December 2012 and met the regulations inspected.

There was a registered manager in post 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, 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.

Relatives told us their family members felt safe and at ease with care staff. Care staff understood how to identify different types of potential or actual abuse and were aware of their responsibility to immediately report any safeguarding concerns to their line manager. Risks were assessed and individual written guidance was produced for staff, to enable people to safely receive care and support in their own homes, in accordance with their own wishes. However, some staff were not familiar with the provider’s whistleblowing policy.

People were supported by staff who had been recruited in a thorough and safe manner. Staff had received training about how to safely prompt or assist people with their prescribed medicines. However, at the time of this inspection people received any required medicines support from their relatives.

People were consulted and supported to make choices about how their care and support was given. The provider had systems in place to ensure that people’s rights were protected and staff gave us detailed accounts of how they always sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Staff had not yet attended training about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) but arrangements had been made for this training to be delivered.

People were ordinarily supported by their relatives to liaise with health and social care professionals by their relatives. Where required, staff supported people to meet their nutritional and hydration needs. Care staff reported any concerns about people’s day-to-day wellbeing, health care needs and safety to the registered manager and they understood when it was necessary to seek emergency help.

Relatives told us they were confident that staff had received appropriate training and support to effectively understand and meet people’s needs. The provider’s training and development programme showed that staff received mandatory training, regular supervision and support to access national health and social care qualifications.

Staff were described by relatives as being, “kind and caring”, “always punctual, so reliable” and “very gentle and nice.” Relatives told us they particularly appreciated how the provider ensured that their family members received a consistently delivered service from a limited number of care staff, which included staff that spoke the same first language of their family.

The provider sought feedback from people and their relatives in order to check how the quality of their service could be improved. Relatives told us they had never had cause to make a complaint and thought that the registered manager would take any complaints seriously.

The service was well managed. Staff told us they felt properly guided and supported by the management team. Relatives were positive about the registered manager’s ‘hands-on’ approach, which