This was an announced inspection that took place on 17 January 2017.

This service provides personal care and support in people's own homes for vulnerable adults and children aged 13 to 18. It is located in the Greenford area of London.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the previous inspection on 3 February 2014, the agency was meeting the standards under the previous method of regulation. At this inspection the regulations were met.

People told us they were happy with the service the agency provided and notified of changes to the timing of their care or staff providing it. The support was provided to their satisfaction, the staff were professional and really cared. People thought the service provided was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

The agency records were kept up to date and covered all aspects of the care and support people received, their choices and identified and met their needs. They were clearly recorded, fully completed, and regularly reviewed with information that enabled staff to perform their duties well.

Staff knew the people they gave support to and the way people liked to be supported. They also worked well as a team providing information when it was required. Staff provided care and support in a friendly, skilled and supportive way that was focussed on the individual. They were well trained, knowledgeable and made themselves accessible to people using the service and their relatives. Staff said the organisation was a good one to work for and they enjoyed their work. They had access to good training, support and there were opportunities for career advancement.

People using the service, including younger adults and their parents were encouraged to discuss health and other needs with staff that may affect their support needs and the way they were met. People also agreed information that was passed on to GP’s and other community based health professionals, as appropriate. Staff protected people from nutrition and hydration associated risks by giving advice about healthy food options and balanced diets whilst still making sure people’s meal likes, dislikes and preferences were met.

The agency staff knew about the Mental Capacity Act and their responsibilities regarding it.

People told us the office, management team and organisation were approachable, responsive, encouraged feedback and frequently monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.

We spoke to staff and relatives of people who used the service. Relatives were satisfied with the service and staff that were provided. One relative told us ‘They are great’.

People using the service consented to care and were given choices in activities and relatives were consulted when activities were discussed.

We inspected care records and risk assessments and found the provider was organising care effectively and planning interventions that met people’s needs and involved them in their care. The provider was allocating staff effectively and care staff told us they had enough time and resources to manage their workload effectively.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the care being provided to people using the service to ensure they were receiving good care and any areas for improvement were identified and addressed.

We looked at the complaints policy and process and found that, whilst there were very few complaints about the service, people felt able to raise concerns if they needed to. People who used the service told us they had confidence in the senior management team to resolve any issues quickly and effectively.

We spoke with two people who use the service, or their representatives, one social care professional involved in people’s care, the agency’s registered manager and four care workers.

People using the service or their representatives told us that they felt well supported and safe with their care workers. Their comments included “they’re good, they work to the care plan and people are well supported” and “they are flexible and provide a good service.”

We found that the care needs of people using the service were assessed and recorded in their care plans. Risk assessments had been completed to make sure that people were cared for safely.

The agency had thorough recruitment policies and procedures and all required pre-employment checks were carried out.

The service had procedures for monitoring the quality of services provided. This meant that people using the service received the care and support they needed.