The inspection took place on 29 November 2016 . The inspection was announced.

St George’s Park Limited is registered as a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people in their own homes within the St George’s Park retirement community. They provide services to any people needing care and support who live in the apartments on the retirement homes site. St George’s Park is a community of retirement apartments set in lovely grounds in East Sussex. There were approximately 24 people receiving support to meet their personal care needs on the day we inspected.

There was a registered manager based at the service. 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 said they felt safe when receiving their support from St George’s Park Limited and knew who to contact if they had any worries about their safety. The provider had safeguarding procedures in place that were easy for staff to follow. Staff understood what their responsibilities were in safeguarding people within their role. They knew who to report their concerns to and were confident they would be listened to.

Risks to individual people and their circumstances had been identified, with actions put in place to reduce the risk and maintain people’s safety. Some of these were detailed, with step by step by guidance to manage the risk, however some were less detailed. We have made a recommendation about this.

People’s home environment, inside and outside, had been checked for hazards before their support commenced, helping to keep people and staff safe. Most people did not need help from staff to take their medicines, as they managed this themselves or family and friends helped, however some people did require support. Staff had the training necessary to equip them with the skills to safely administer medicines to people.

The provider had robust recruitment processes in place to make sure new staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people in their own homes. Enough staff were employed to be able to run a service that was responsive to people’s needs. People told us that staff were always on time when visiting and always stayed to support them for the whole time they were allocated.

New staff had an induction to make sure they were confident and competent before supporting people for the first time. This included shadowing an experienced member of staff. However, these shadowing shifts were not formally recorded to evidence that they had actually happened. We have made a recommendation about this.

Staff had suitable training at induction when they were new as well as regular updates. Most of the training was face to face training, delivered by the provider’s in house trainer who was based on site. Additional training was available to make sure staff were skilled and confident to cater for specialist needs, such as to support people with diabetes. Staff had ‘spot checks’ to make sure their practice continued to be safe and of good quality as well as one to one supervision.

Although most people looked after their own health care needs or had a family member who helped with this, staff supported some people who needed assistance when requiring health care appointments or advice. This was clearly evidenced through the recordings in people’s care records. Most people also managed their own meals or had family members who helped them. Where the need for support with nutrition and hydration had been identified, staff supported people with their meals and drinks through the day.

People told us they made their own decisions and choices and staff were clear that people were in control of their care and support. Mental capacity assessments had been undertaken where appro

The inspection began at 11am and was completed at 2.40pm. We were advised that the service provides the regulated activity Personal Care to around 20 people. We spoke on the telephone with three people who used the service and a relative of someone who used the service. We spoke with the manager for the service and three members of staff. One person who used the service told us “Things are going very well.” A relative said “Everything is being done to our full satisfaction.” A member of staff told us “I really enjoy working here. The team are very friendly.”

People’s privacy and dignity was respected in how their care was provided. One person told us “They help me keep my dignity.” People told us that they had taken an active part in deciding what their care package should be.

People told us that their care and support had been well managed. One person said "I receive the help I need." Another said "I am helped in the way I want it done.” People told us that carers were punctual, and supported them in the way they wished to be supported. We saw that care plans showed that needs and risk assessments were in place which enabled care workers to support individuals in a safe and appropriate way. A member of staff told us “People get very good care and get the care they need.”

There were arrangements in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. The provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening by arranging regular training for staff. Discussion with staff showed that they understood different forms of abuse and the systems in place to protect people from abuse.

Members of staff had received training and support which had helped them deliver care and treatment to people safely and to an appropriate standard.

People felt they could approach the service if they had any concerns or complaints. They told us that the manager regularly asked them for their views about the service and the care provided. People told us that their comments about the service were listened to and acted on.

We spoke with three people who used the service and one relative. All of the people we spoke with praised their care and support. People described it as "Very good" and "Excellent." One person said, "I could not praise them highly enough." People said that staff and the manager were professional, respectful and helpful. We found that people were treated with dignity and respect. People were given choices in their care.

People's support was planned and delivered in line with people's assessed needs and preferences. People and their relatives were involved in care planning. The manager regularly reviewed and updated people's care records to ensure they were accurate and fit for purpose.

People told us that they felt safe receiving care from the staff. People felt comfortable to raise any complaints or concerns although the people we spoke with said they did not have any. We found that people were safeguarded against the risk of abuse and neglect because staff understood how to identify and report concerns. The provider responded appropriately to complaints and safeguarding concerns.

We found that staff had received training and support. We spoke with three members of staff who told us they felt supported and had a high level of job satisfaction. However, we found that training updates were not monitored and most staff training was significantly out of date.

The provider maintained up to date records in a secure manner.