This announced inspection was carried out on 9 November 2016. Home Instead Senior Care provides support and personal care to people living in their own homes in Maidstone and the surrounding areas. On the day of the inspection there were 12 people using the service who received personal care.

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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were supported by staff who understood the risks people could face and knew how to make people feel safe. People were encouraged to be independent and risks were mitigated in the least restrictive way possible.

People were supported by consistent staff who they knew. People who required support to take their medicines received assistance to do so when this was needed.

People were provided with the care and support they wanted by staff who were trained and supported to do so. People’s human right to make decisions for themselves was respected and they provided consent to their care when needed.

People were supported by staff who understood their health conditions and ensured they had sufficient to eat and drink to maintain their wellbeing.

People were provided with a creative and person centred service which was caring and consistent. People described the service they received in exceptional terms and staff displayed dedication and commitment to their work. People decided what care and support they needed which was provided in a manner that valued and respected each person who used the service.

People were able to influence the way their care and support was delivered and they could rely on this being provided as they wished. People were informed on how to express any issues or concerns they had so these could be investigated and acted upon.

People who used the service and care workers were able to express their views about the service which were acted upon. The management team provided leadership that gained the respect of care workers and motivated them as a team. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and make improvements when needed.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector .We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected that included an area of non-compliance identified during previous inspections. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found.

At the time of the inspection one person was receiving personal care and support from the service. The service was providing a number of other people with a companionship service, this type of service is not regulated by the Commission. We spoke with four members of staff and one relative.

Is the service safe?

Written guidance was in place for staff to follow to make sure that they provided care and support safely to people. Staff received the training they needed be able to provide care safely.

The service made sure that equipment used, such as hoists, was in good working order so that people were supported safely

Is the service effective?

People were involved in the assessment process and involved in developing their individual plan of care. This meant that they influenced the support they received.

The service promoted people’s health and wellbeing. Thank you letters from people and relatives showed that people’s quality of life had improved due to the care and support provided by staff and that people and relatives valued the service.

The service had a complaints procedure, a relative told us a concern they had raised had been addressed satisfactorily.

Is the service caring?

The service made sure that staff had plenty of time for people, did not rush them and allowed them to be as independent as they could. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about people’s needs.

Is the service responsive?

The service supported people to access other agencies when they needed to, and had built up a network of organisations to liaise with.

People were informed if staff were going to be late for a visit or if there were any changes to the staff they expected to be supporting them.

Is the service well led?

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities, told us they were well supported and enjoyed working for the service.

The service had internal systems in place to monitor its quality. We saw that it took prompt action if areas for improvement were identified.

Eight people were regularly using the service at the time of the inspection, two other people used it when they needed to. This was the first inspection of the service since it became registered with The Care Quality Commission in November 2012.

We spoke with two people who used the service, three relatives and two members of staff. People confirmed that their needs were assessed before care was provided. They had copies of their care records at home and said their care was regularly reviewed.

People felt involved in how their care and support was provided, they said staff respected that they liked to keep as independent as possible. They said they felt safe with staff and staff respected their property.

People were complimentary about staff. They said “Such lovely people come to see me, I would not change them for anything” and “They help me a great deal”. They said staff were kind, reliable, respectful, supported them in the ways they preferred and that their dignity was maintained.

People were positive about the service, one person said “Everything is going very well”. No one we spoke with had any concerns but people knew who to go to with if they did have any concerns or complaints.