We inspected this service on 5 August 2016. The inspection was announced. The service is registered to deliver personal care in people’s own homes and also provides a live-in service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

The service is provided for adults who may live with learning disabilities, autistic spectrum disorder, mental health, a physical disability or sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection, 110 people were receiving the service.

People were safe and were protected from the risks of abuse. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood the action they should take if they had any concerns that people were at risk of harm. The registered manager checked staff’s suitability to deliver personal care in people’s own homes during the recruitment process.

Care plans included risk assessments for people’s individual health and wellbeing and described the actions staff needed to take to minimise the identified risks. Staff understood people’s needs and abilities because they read the care plans and shadowed experienced staff when they started working for the service.

The registered manager assessed risks in each person’s home and advised staff of the actions they should take to minimise the risks. People’s medicines were administered safely because the provider’s medicines administration policy included training staff and checking that people received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff received training and support that enabled them to meet people’s needs effectively. Staff had opportunities to reflect on their practice and consider their personal career development.

The manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Records showed that people, their families and other health professionals were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff understood they could only care for and support people who consented to being cared for.

Staff referred people to healthcare professionals for advice and support when their health needs changed, and supported people to follow the health professionals’ advice.

People told us their care staff were kind and understood them well, so they felt like friends. The provider asked people about their preferences, likes and dislikes for care and support during their initial assessment of needs.

People told us staff respected their privacy, dignity and independence, and they were supported to live the lives they wanted. People knew any concerns or complaints would be listened to and action taken to resolve any issues.

People were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the service through surveys and one-to-one conversations with a member of the management team.

The staff and management team shared common values about the aims and objectives of the service. People were supported and encouraged to live as independently as possible, according to their needs and abilities.

The provider’s quality monitoring system included regular checks of people’s care plans and staff’s practice. When issues were identified the provider took action to improve the quality of the service people received.

During our visit we spoke with the provider, the manager, the operations manager, the service manager and two office staff of Casa Care Limited. Following our visit we spoke with ten people who used the service and six relatives of people to obtain their views of the service. We also spoke with three care workers following our visit.

People and their representatives told us they were involved in their care and treatment decisions. Some people told us they were not given the option of what time they could have their care call. They said they were happy with the care provided.

We saw care plans for three people who received a service from Casa Care. The care plans contained important information about people, for example people’s next of kin details. People told us that sometimes their care call was late.

Comments from people and their family members included, “They (care workers) are respectful, they have the right attitude. The care is personalised to X very much” and “I am quite happy with them (Casa Care).”

The service had systems in place for recruitment of care staff and we saw checks had been undertaken to ensure staff were suitable to look after people safely.

We found the service had good systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided and was well led.