Sova Healthcare provides domiciliary care to people living in their own homes. It provides personal care to a range of people including older people, people living with dementia, people with mental health needs, people with learning disabilities and younger adults. At the time of our inspection 11 people were receiving a personal care service.

At the last inspection in January 2016, the service was rated 'Good'. At this inspection we found the service remained 'Good'.

Staff received safeguarding training so they knew how to recognise the signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report any concerns of abuse.

Staffing arrangements were suitable to keep people safe. The staff recruitment practices ensured staff were suitable to work with people.

Staff followed infection control procedures to reduce the risks of spreading infection or illness.

The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), which came into force in August 2016. The AIS is a framework that makes it a legal requirement for all providers to ensure people with a disability or sensory loss can access and understand information they are given.

Risk management plans were not always fully in place to protect and promote people's safety.

Where the provider took on the responsibility for the management of medicines, staff followed practice guidelines, though not all staff had been trained before they assisted with people having their medicines.

On-going refresher training was provided to ensure staff were able to provide care and support for people, though not all staff had received induction training when they first started work at the service.

The regularity of staff supervision systems did not fully ensure that staff received regular one to one supervision and appraisal of their performance.

Staff supported people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain a varied and balanced diet.

People had been supported to have health appointments though not all people had regular optical and dental appointments to make sure they received continuing healthcare to meet their needs.

People were encouraged to be involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and they gained people's consent before providing personal care.

People had their privacy, dignity and confidentiality maintained.

The provider followed their complaints procedure when dealing with complaints.

Staff consistently provided people with respectful and compassionate care. People had their diverse needs assessed and met. They had positive relationships with staff and received care to meet their personal preferences.

People, their relatives and other professionals told us that they had confidence in the management of the service to provide managerial oversight and leadership.

This inspection took place on 21 January 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office.

SOVA Healthcare Leicester is a domiciliary care service providing care and support to people living in their own homes. The office is based in Leicester and the service currently provides care and support to people living in Leicester. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people using the service.

SOVA Healthcare Leicester 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.

People told us they felt safe with the care staff and the support they received. People were kept safe from the risk of harm. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to raise concerns. People had detailed assessments which identified actions staff needed to take to protect people from risks.

People were supported by the number of staff identified as necessary in their care plans to keep them safe. There were robust recruitment and induction processes in place to ensure new members of staff were suitable to support the people who used the service.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to ensure people were supported in line with their care needs and best practice. People confirmed that they had consistent carers who stayed for the length of time allocated and usually arrived on time. People also confirmed that calls were very rarely missed and that a duty manager was always available.

We found that people were involved in decisions about their care and support. Care staff sought consent before they assisted people and staff respected people's choices and decisions. People told us how staff cared and supported them with dignity and respect and encouraged them to be as independent as possible.

Care staff supported people to liaise with health care professionals if there were any concerns about their health.

People's plans of care contained good information about the support people required. Plans of care were written in a way that recognised people's individual needs and preferences and put the person at the centre of the planning process. The records we saw were complete and up to date.

The provider was responsive to people's needs. People were supported by staff they said they liked and care was delivered in line with their wishes. People told us they were aware of how to raise concerns. They were confident that any concerns would be responded to by the registered manager and provider.

People were confident in how the service was led and the abilities of the management team. There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, which included checks on care staff delivering care and review of people's care. The provider and managers were committed to providing quality care to people.

People who used the service felt they were listened to and were given opportunities to share their views and opinions about the quality of the service they received through surveys, reviews, home visits and telephone calls.