We inspected Home Instead Senior Care on 13 November 2018. The inspection was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in. The service first became operational in July 2017. This was the first inspection of the service.

Home Instead Senior Care is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of the inspection it was providing a service to 12 people.

There was not a registered manager at the service 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 service had two managers in the role and they had started the process to apply for the position of the registered managers.

The service was exceptionally caring. Care staff knew the importance of developing good working relationships with the people they looked after and ensured they provided person centred care based on their specific needs. The feedback we received from people, and their relatives, and health and social care professionals was overwhelmingly positive. Care plans contained detailed information about people’s interests, family life and life history. The service had helped a person actively to make contact with a cultural group they were previously involved in, so there could be sense of belonging for the person. The service promoted people to live as independently as possible at home and accessing the community. The service worked with other agencies to support people to be safe in the community. People were supported by a team of regular staff that they knew and who they said were kind and caring. Staff respected people's privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

People’s needs were assessed and their preferences identified as much as possible across all aspects of their care. Risks were identified and plans were in place to monitor and reduce risks. People had access to relevant health professionals when they needed them. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed by the service. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks on their backgrounds completed. Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Staff undertook training and received regular supervision to help support them to provide effective care. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). MCA is legislation protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. People were supported with their nutrition and hydration needs.

People were supported to access activities within the community. People’s cultural and religious needs were respected when planning and delivering care. Discussions with staff members showed that they respected people’s sexual orientation so that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people could feel accepted and welcomed in the service.

The service had a complaints procedure in place and we found that complaints were investigated and where possible resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant. The service had end of life policies and procedures in place.

Staff told us the service had an open and inclusive atmosphere and the management team were approachable and open. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms in place so the voices of staff, people and their relatives were heard and acted on to shape the service.