This inspection took place on 06 and 07 February 2018 and was announced. We gave the registered manager notice of our intention to undertake an inspection. This was because The Regal Swan provides personal care for people who live in their own homes and we needed to be sure that someone would be available at the office.

This was the first inspection of this service since it was registered in October 2016.

The Regal Swan is a domiciliary care agency. They provide personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. They provide a service to older adults and people who have dementia. At the time of our inspection four people received personal care in their own homes.

Not everyone using The Regal Swan may receive the regulated activity, personal care. CQC only inspects the service which provides ‘personal care’ to people, such as, help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. The registered manager was also the provider of 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 told us they felt safe with the care they received from the staff who supported them. Staff demonstrated good knowledge in how they were to protect people from harm, they recognised the signs of abuse and knew how to report this. The registered manager had identified potential risks to people and had put plans in place to support staff in how to manage this risk. There were enough staff to support people’s care needs, however, the registered manager had put people at potential risk of unsafe staffing numbers. This was because the registered manager did not have a contingency plan should they or their care staff member become unavailable to support people. People were supported with their medicines in a safe way, however the recording of people’s medicines put them at potential risk of harm. Staff understood the importance of reducing the risk of infection to keep people safe.

Staff received support and some training from the registered manager. However staff were not supported to receive more formalised training and the registered manager did not keep themselves up to date with best practice. We found where people required support to prepare meals staff supported them with this. Staff worked with external healthcare professionals and followed their guidance and advice about how to support the person.

People’s views and decisions they had made about their care respected by staff who supported them. People and relatives felt the staff team were kind and friendly and treated them with respect.

People received personalised care which met their needs in a timely way. People told us they were happy with the service and had no complaints. The registered manager confirmed that no complaints had been received. However we found that the registered manager had not ensured people had access to information about how they could complain about the service.

We found that some of the systems and processes in place were not established to ensure the service was consistently well-led. With only the registered manager and one care staff member, the registered manager had put people at potential risk of missed or unorganised care calls should they become unavailable as no contingency plan was in place. We found the registered manager did not have formalised systems for ensuring staff were knowledgeable of fundamental information, or keeping up to date with best practice.

People told us they had the opportunity to raise their suggestions and ideas about how the service was run. People felt th