Our inspection took place on 1 August 2018 and was announced.

This was our first inspection of the service since the provider’s registration.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to younger and older people, people with dementia and those with physical disabilities.

At the time of our inspection, 11 people used the service and there were seven staff.

The provider is required to have a registered manager as part of their conditions of registration. 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. At the time of our inspection, there was a manager registered with us.

There were policies and systems in place to safeguard people, assess risks and manage them, and to manage people's medicines safely. We made a recommendation about staff knowledge of the safeguarding legislation and best practice of medicines management in the community. There were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs. People provided feedback which indicated care calls were on time. The provider continuously monitored the status of all care calls, both from the office base and remotely. In addition, the office would call people and relatives if care workers were behind schedule. The service had implemented an effective electronic records system, which monitored any missed or late calls.

People's needs were met including support with eating and drinking and accessing healthcare. The provider ensured there were systems in place to ensure staff had the right training, qualifications, support and supervision to do their job.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated codes of practice. People were assisted to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems at the service supported this practice. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible and remain living in their own homes.

People’s care preferences, likes and dislikes were assessed, recorded and respected. The service was very caring. There was complimentary feedback from people who used the service and their relatives. People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. People’s privacy and dignity was respected when care was provided to them.

Care plans were detailed and contained very person-centred information. This explained how staff could support people in the right way. We saw there was complaints system in place which included the ability for people to contact any staff member or the management team. We made a recommendation about the communicating with people effectively in accordance with the Accessible Information Standard.

People, staff and others had very positive opinions about the management and leadership of the service. Staff told us they liked working at the service which indicated there was a good workplace culture. Audits and checks were used to monitor the quality of care. We made a recommendation about the use of equality, diversity and human rights throughout the service’s operations. There were good connections between the service and relevant health and social care agencies.