The inspection took place on the 14 December 2016 and was announced. This was the service’s first inspection. We informed the provider 48 hours in advance of our visit that we would be inspecting. This was to ensure there was somebody at the location to facilitate our inspection.

Unique Contact and Community Services Limited is a domiciliary service providing support and personal care to mainly children and young adults in their home. At the time of the inspection nine people were receiving a domiciliary service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Relatives were happy with staff and that their family member was kept safe in their care when receiving support. Staff wore identification so relatives knew the staff member was from the correct service. Staff knew how to identify the different types of abuse and how to escalate within the service or to the local authority and Care Quality Commission.

Risk was identified and assessed. Risk assessments were detailed to protect people from the risks of using equipment, going into the community and safely moving and handling them within their homes. Equipment was also checked by staff before use to ensure its safety.

Recruitment was carried out safely and the service checked that staff were of suitable character by verifying their documentation entitling them to work within the United Kingdom, a criminal records check, previous experience and references.

Medicines were not currently administered by the service but staff were trained in the safe management of medicines and explained how they would give them to people safely.

The risk of infection was minimised as staff exercised good hand hygiene when in people’s homes and wore personal protective equipment.

Staff were supported in their role to be effective and to have the skills and knowledge needed to support the people they cared for. Staff received training that was relevant to their role and were supervised regularly by deputy manager. Staff also received an annual appraisal to review the previous year’s work. Relatives were asked to give consent on behalf of their children but staff still asked the people they cared for their consent before delivering care.

Where food was prepared by staff it was done in a way that met people’s nutritional and religious needs.

Staff were caring towards the people they cared for and showed compassion when speaking to them and their relatives. Some relatives expressed the need to have care staff who could speak English well to support effective communication. We have made a recommendation about staff communicating more effectively with people and relatives.

People’s care plans were up to date and personalised to their needs. The service asked people where they could and people’s relatives to ensure they prepared care that met individuals needs.

Relatives spoke positively of the deputy manager but they advised they did not know who the registered manager of the service was. We have made a recommendation about people using the service are aware who the registered manager of the service is.

Staff enjoyed working at the service and felt they could easily approach the management team as they had an open door policy and were transparent with information.

The service had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service which included telephone monitoring, spot checks and audits of people’s care plans and other records relating to care.