We inspected this service on 17 March 2017. This inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. There were 54 people in receipt of personal care support at the time of this inspection visit. At our previous inspection on the 29 April 2015 the provider was meeting the regulations that we checked. At this inspection the service continued to meet the regulations that we checked but we identified that improvements were needed.

The service had 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.

Quality monitoring systems were in place but we found these were not always effective. For example the provider was not following their own policy in ensuring all staff received training updates when required. Care staff were transcribing people’s prescribed medicine onto medicine administration records, but no safety checks were in place to ensure any errors in hand written transcripts could be identified. Staff understood the support people needed and worked well with health care professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. However people’s care records were not always updated in a timely way to reflect these changes in support.

People received their calls as agreed and from a consistent staff team. People were protected from abuse as staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and their role in reporting concerns. Checks on staff were done before they started work to ensure they were suitable to support people. People were supported to take their medicine when needed.

Staff supported people to make their own decisions. When people were unable to consent, assessments had been undertaken regarding those specific decisions to ensure they were made in their best interests and with the involvement of their family and friends. The delivery of care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and preferences.

We inspected this service on 29 April 2015 and the inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. Our last inspection was carried out in December 2013 and no breaches of regulations were found at that time.

Radis Community Care (Burton on Trent) provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes in Burton upon Trent and the surrounding areas. At the time of our visit 63 people were receiving a service.

Staff understood how to protect people from abuse and were responsive to their needs. People were protected against the risk of abuse, as checks were made to confirm staff were of good character to work with people in their own homes. Sufficient staff were available to meet people's needs and they received their calls as agreed.

Risk assessments and care plans had been developed with the involvement of people. Staff had the relevant information on how to minimise identified risks to ensure people were supported in a safe way. People had equipment in place when needed, so that staff could assist them safely.

Staff understood people’s needs and abilities and were provided with training to support them to meet the needs of people they cared for. Staff knew about people’s individual capacity to make decisions and supported people to make their own decisions. People’s needs and preferences were met when they were supported with their dietary needs.

Staff treated people in a caring way and respected their privacy. Staff supported people to maintain their dignity. People’s needs were assessed and care plans were in place to support staff to meet people’s needs appropriately. People were supported to maintain good health; we saw that staff alerted health care professionals if they had any concerns about people’s health.

People knew how to make a complaint and were confident that their complaint would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary. Arrangements were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, so that actions could be put in place to drive improvement. There were systems in place to supervise and manage all staff, to ensure staff’s practice was monitored and to identify when additional support or training was required. Positive communication was encouraged and people’s feedback about the support provided was sought by the registered manager to further develop the service and drive improvement. The management of the service was open and transparent.

Our inspection was discussed and arranged two days in advance. This was to ensure we had time to speak with staff, as well as people using the service.

There were approximately 45 people using the service at the time of the inspection. We spoke with seventeen people using the service or their relatives by telephone. We spoke with two staff, and the registered manager in person.

People received safe and appropriate care because their needs were assessed before care was delivered. This ensured the provider could meet people's individual needs.

We were informed people were treated with care and compassion and the staff responded well to their needs.

Staff received appropriate training, supervision and appraisal. People using the service and staff told us there was sufficient training to ensure that people’s needs were understood and met.

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

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We asked people to tell us what it was like to receive services from this home care agency as part of a targeted inspection programme of domiciliary care agencies with particular regard to how people's dignity was upheld and how they can make choices about their care. The inspection team was led by a CQC inspector and joined by an “expert by experience”, Expert by Experience who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

We visited three people in their own home as part of this review and spoke with them and their relatives about their experiences of the support they have received. We spoke with senior staff at the time of our visit to the office and also spoke with three care workers. We spoke with 20 people over the telephone who received a service from this agency.

People were involved in planning their own care. The service met with them to discuss their care and to talk about how they wanted their care to be provided. One person said to us: "I wouldn't have signed my plan if I hadn't agreed with it".

People felt that they were treated with respect and that their dignity and privacy was promoted. Comments from people included: “They are sensitive, they don’t make me feel embarrassed”, “The girls put me at my ease, I feel safe with them”.

Everyone was pleased with the care they received. They had regular care workers and they told us that they knew their needs. People said staff were caring and polite and knew how to provide their care in the way they wanted. Everyone said they felt safe.

People told us they would contact the office if they had any concerns. They said they were confident that the manager would take action to sort out issues they raised.

The service sought people's views about their service. People were telephoned about their service and were always asked their views when senior staff completed monitoring visits to check that the care workers were undertaking their work correctly.