Crayke House provides a reablement service to people in their own homes. The service is available to people who live between York and Thirsk and the surrounding villages. People are mostly provided with care and support for up to six weeks, to help them regain their independence and confidence following an illness or injury. At the time of this inspection there were nine people using the service.

This inspection took place on 15 May 2017 and was announced.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The registered provider is required to have a registered manager, but at the time of our inspection the manager in post was not registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). However, there was a manager in post who had submitted an application to be registered with CQC. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if they suspected abuse might be taking place. Risks to people were identified and plans were put in place to help manage the risk and minimise them occurring whilst encouraging and promoting peoples’ independence.

At the time of this inspection staff were not currently supporting people with medicines. However, systems and processes were in place for trained staff to follow should it be required.

There was sufficient staff available to respond to meet people’s individual needs and preferences. All staff had a set rota and a member of staff were available at all times should people need to contact them.

A comprehensive training plan was in place and all staff had completed up to date training.

People were supported by a regular team of staff who were knowledgeable about people’s likes, dislikes and preferences.

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

People were able to manage meals independently and staff encouraged this.

Care plans detailed people’s needs, wishes and preferences and were person-centred. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they contained up to date information that was meeting people’s individual care needs. People were actively involved in care planning and decision making and this was evident in signed care plans and consent forms.

The service had a clear process for handling complaints.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and felt supported by the manager.

Quality assurance processes were in place and regularly carried out by the manager and registered provider, to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

The service worked with various health and social care professionals and sought advice to ensure individual needs were being met.

Feedback was sought from people who used the service and action was taken when shortfalls were identified.

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

Further information is in the detailed findings below:

We undertook this announced inspection on the 28 April 2015. At the previous inspection, which took place on 3 April 2013 the service met all of the regulations that we assessed.

Crayke House Domiciliary Care Agency Easingwold (North Yorkshire County Council) provides a predominantly reablement service known as The Short Term Assessment and Reablement Team (START) to people in their homes. The service is available to people who live between York and Thirsk and the surrounding villages. Mostly people are provided with care and support for up to six weeks, to help them regain their independence and confidence following an illness or injury. A few people received care on a longer term basis. At the time of our inspection there were 16 people who received a service from the agency.

People we spoke with said they felt safe with staff from the agency. People told us how they valued the service they had received from the START team, as most people experienced short term domiciliary care for around 6 weeks after a hospital stay.

Staff were recruited safely and they were trained appropriately to be able to support people.

The service had safeguarding vulnerable adult’s policies and procedures which were understood by staff. Staff received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and all those spoken with confirmed that they would report back to their line managers should any aspect of poor care be observed.

Staff identified and understood individual risks to people and worked with them to minimise these risks whilst also supporting them to remain as independent as possible.

People were positive about the staff who supported them. People using the service described staff from the agency as being kind, caring, polite, respectful and friendly.

People told us they were able to make choices. Their likes, dislikes and personal preferences were recorded within their care records and were known and understood by staff.

Training was provided for all staff and staff said this supported them in their roles. They received appropriate induction, training, supervision and support.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 which is in place for people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. The legislation is designed to ensure that any decisions are made in people’s best interests.

The manager had an effective quality assurance system in place which ensured that the agency provided care to people in their own homes in a safe and effective way.

The agency had received complaints and we saw that they had dealt with them appropriately. People we spoke with told us that they had not had to make any complaints about the agency and knew who they needed to contact if they felt the need to do so.

We spoke with three people who used the service and with three staff members via the telephone. We also spoke with the provider during our visit.

People who used the service told us they were happy and satisfied with the care and support provided. They made comments such as "The staff are very efficient.” And “I would certainly recommend this service. I could not have managed without them.”

People told us staff supported them as they wished to be supported and were always polite and respectful. They also said that the staff respected their privacy and protected their dignity when providing care.

We looked at people’s care records. We found that records were consistent, accurate and up to date. The staff we spoke with told us how they delivered care in a person-centred way which meant people were consulted and included in decisions about their care.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure these were managed in a safe way.

We reviewed the recruitment and selection processes and found them to be robust. This ensured that people were supported by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

This was the first inspection of the agency. We saw that they had worked hard to put everything in place to make sure that people were safely cared for. This included policies and procedures, induction training for staff and quality monitoring systems.