The inspection took place on 26, 27 and 30 July, 1 and 10 August 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice because the service was a domiciliary care agency and we wanted to make sure someone would be at the office to assist with the inspection.

Home Instead Senior Care South East Northumberland is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults. Not everyone using the service receives the regulated activity personal care. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with personal care such as help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of this inspection, the service provided personal care to 13 people. All of the people that received care from the provider had made the choice to use the service as it was either privately funded or through the use of their direct payments.

The service registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in July 2017. This is the first inspection of the service.

The service was a franchise, operated by a husband and wife team, the nominated individual and registered manager. Both were former social workers. 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.

People and relatives were extremely positive about the caring nature of staff. Staff used inclusive ways of communicating with people so they were supported to take ownership of their care. The service saw people as partners. They were consulted, listened to and valued.

The service had a special ambassador - a dog named Martha who belonged to the registered manager. People told us they loved seeing her and she brought comfort to them.

People and relatives described the responsiveness of staff as outstanding. The service was exceedingly flexible and responsive to people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff gave us numerous examples of how they went the extra mile to provide responsive care which was tailored to the individual needs of people. They had organised a special birthday celebration for one person. Staff collected them in a limousine and returned them home after the party.

The provider displayed a commitment to incorporating people’s views in the running of the service. Feedback systems had been designed so they were inclusive, and enabled each person’s voice to be heard.

People and relatives consistently praised the service. One person told us, “I would rate it as 100%.” The provider evidenced a commitment not only to people who used the service, but for making improvements within the local area for people living with dementia. The nominated individual was a dementia champion and delivered workshops on dementia to local businesses and charities.

There was a strong emphasis on continually striving to improve. Checks were carried out to monitor the quality and safety of the service and ensure that people were receiving excellent outcomes.

Staff were passionate about their roles, and throughout our conversations, key themes such as excellent morale and job satisfaction were consistently mentioned. One staff member said, “They are a great company and we have a fantastic team. I am always made to feel very appreciated.”

People told us they felt safe. There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place. Staff were knowledgeable about what action they would take if abuse was suspected. There was a safe system in place for the management of medicines.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. A training programme was in place. Staff were trained in safe working practices and to meet the specific needs of people who used the ser