This inspection took place on 31 March 2017 and was unannounced.

Aster care is a domiciliary care service which supports people to live at home who may have long term health conditions; which could mean people needed twenty four hour care. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting five people who required support with living at home. Some people were being provided with twenty four hour care and at times required the support of two care staff.

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.

We visited the office on 31 March 2017.

People were supported by a staff team who knew them well and were committed to providing them with the highest quality of care. Staff told us their focus was on trying to make people happy and ensure they felt comfortable and remained as independent as possible. Professionals told us Aster Care had supported and maintained relationships where other agencies had failed.

People and staff benefited from a management team at Aster Care which valued staff’s contributions, skills and achievements. Staff told us “This is the best place I have worked at”.

People were protected from risks relating to their health, mobility, medicines, nutrition and behaviours. People’s individual risks had been assessed and staff had taken action to seek guidance where required and minimise identified risks. Where accidents and incidents had taken place, these had been reviewed and action had been taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. Staff supported people to take their medicines safely where required and as prescribed by their doctor.

Staff knew how to recognise possible signs of abuse which helped protect people. Staff knew what signs to look out for and the procedures to follow should they need to report concerns.

Recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure only people of good character were employed by the service. Staff underwent relevant checks before they started work in order to ensure they were suitable to work with people who could be deemed vulnerable.

Staff received training as well as regular supervision and appraisal. Staff’s knowledge and competencies were regularly checked in order to ensure they had a thorough understanding of the training they had received. We raised a concern about who deemed staff competent for some staff training, especially regarding medical procedures. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how to put it into practice. People were asked for their consent prior to receiving any personal care. Communication methods used with people were individually tailored and enabled the delivery of care.

People and their relatives were involved in their care and staff respected people’s wishes. People’s care plans were personalised and included information about how they liked things to be done.

Care was provided in a minimum of a six hour blocks Staff would never leave a person until the next staff member arrived. People received care from consistent staff teams. This helped people develop trusting and comfortable relationships with staff and increase confidence in having staff in their own homes.

The service had a clear complaints procedure and policy which was shared with people and their relatives. Complaints were effectively investigated.

There was open and effective management at the service led by the registered manager, the nominated individual and the company director. Staff felt supported and valued. An audit system was in place to monitor the quality of the service people received. Records were clear, well organised and up-to-date. Unannounced checks to observe staff’s competency were carried