This inspection took place between 28 December 2018 and 21 January 2019, and was announced. This was a new service and the first time this provider had been inspected by the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

AmberGreen Health and Social Care is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of our inspection three people were being provided with a service.

Everyone using AmberGreen Health and Social Care receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The service had a registered manager at the time of the inspection. 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 provided. The registered manager appropriately managed all risks and worked in collaboration with other health professionals when needed. Information in risk plans enabled care staff to be able to safely meet people’s needs due to the level of detail and personalised information.

People told us there were enough competent staff to provide them with support when they needed it and the registered manager covered any shortages.

Staff received extensive training, support and development to carry out their role effectively including spot checks of performance and competency checks of knowledge.

People did not currently require care staff to support them with medicines. However, the provider had robust procedures and policies in place should this be required.

People received proper support to maintain healthy nutrition and hydration.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they were treated with kindness by staff who were caring and respected their privacy and upheld their dignity.

People were given the opportunity to feed back on the service and their views were acted on.

People told us they knew how to complain and were confident they would be listened to if they wished to make a complaint.

People received personalised care that met their individual needs. People were given support and encouragement to do what they could for themselves, and care staff strived to meet people’s individual preferences.

The management team worked hard to create an open, transparent and inclusive atmosphere within the service. People, their relatives and staff were invited to take part in discussions around shaping the future of the service.

There was a robust quality assurance system in place and shortfalls identified were promptly acted on to improve the service.