On the 11 October we inspected CJP Outreach Services Ltd and made phone calls and home visits to people and their relatives and staff on the 20 October and 4 November 2016. At the time of our inspection, there were eight people using the service. This was an announced inspection which meant we gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of our visit.

CJP Outreach Services Ltd offers a range of personal care and specialist services, such as at home respite care, supported breaks and supported holidays for people with learning and physical disabilities and multiple and complex needs living in Calderdale and surrounding areas.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was present throughout the inspection.

The risk to people's safety was reduced because staff could identify the different types of abuse, knew how to report concerns and had attended safeguarding adults training.

Risk assessments had been completed in areas where people's safety could be at risk. People had the freedom to live their lives as they wanted to. Staff were recruited in a safe way. Relatives told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to keep them safe.

Accidents and incidents were investigated. Assessments of the risks associated with the environment where people lived were carried out.

Processes were in place to ensure people's medicines were stored, handled and administered safely.

People were supported by staff who received an induction. Staff received training in the provider’s mandatory courses and person’s specific course. Staff received regular assessment of the quality of their work.

The registered manager ensured the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) had been applied when decisions had been made for people.

Staff ensured people were given choices about their support needs and day to day life. The registered manager was aware of the requirements to apply to the Court of Protection (COP) if applicable.

People were encouraged to plan and buy their own food and were supported to follow a healthy and balanced diet. People's day to day health needs were met by the staff and external professionals. Referrals to relevant health services were made where needed.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring and treated them with respect and dignity. People were able to contribute to decisions about their care and support needs, although examples of this in people's records was limited.

People's support records were person centred and focused on what was important to them. The records were regularly reviewed. People's personal preferences and how they wanted their personal care to be provided was recorded but sometimes lacked detail. Staff had a huge understanding of people but this was not always captured on their documentation.

People were encouraged to take part in activities that were important to them and were provided with the information they needed, in a format they could understand, if they wished to make a complaint.

Relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager. The registered manager understood their responsibilities. Staff and relatives were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service.

Staff were encouraged to develop their roles. There were a number of quality assurance processes in place that regularly assessed the quality and effectiveness of the support provided.

We visited the head quarters of the service and met with the registered manager who told us they currently provided personal care for eleven people who used the service. The majority of people who used the service had complex and multiple needs.

We spoke with the next of kin for two people who used the service; they told us the service provided by CJP Outreach was excellent. One person said, "As far as I'm concerned they do a fantastic job." Another person told us "I think they meet my son's needs very well."

We also spoke with two staff who worked at the service. One member of staff told us "It's a good company I really enjoy working here." Another member of staff said "I really enjoy it I love my job."

We found before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people’s safety and welfare. We saw care plans were person centred and people's wishes were recorded in the care plan.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Medicines were handled appropriately.

Appropriate recruitment checks were in place prior to the employment of staff. We found people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

We visited the head quarters of the service and met with the Registered Manager who told us they currently employ five care staff, who together provided personal care for eight people using the service. The majority of people who use the service have learning or physical disabilities.

They also told us the people who use the service were funded through a variety of sources, such as private funding, local authority, independent living fund or direct payment services.

We spoke with the next of kin for three people who use the service; they told us the service provided by CJP Outreach was excellent. One person said, “The current service works perfectly, the staff are amazing and this is the best agency we have ever used”. Another person told us ‘they had confidence in the manager and staff; they got on well together and felt their relative was safe in their care’.

All of the people told us both they and their relative receiving care were involved in reviewing and evaluating the personal support and care provided and they spoke with the manager frequently. One person told us ‘they spoke with the manager every day and they were a ‘hands on manager’.

We spoke with the relative of a person who uses the service, who told us they were happy with the care received by their relative and that staff were very helpful and always explained what they were doing.

The person we spoke with told us they had been involved in a care plan review twice within the last 12 months. They also told us that they spoke with the Registered Manager at least once a month and were kept informed of the care being provided for their relative.

The person we spoke with told us that they had no concerns about the care received by their relative. They told us that if they had any concerns or complaints, they would speak to the Registered Manager or their Social Worker.