This inspection took place on 29 August and 4, 5, 6 September 2018 and was unannounced. We contacted people who used the service and staff by telephone on 5 and 6 September 2018 to ask for their views. On 29 August and 4 September, we spent time at the office site, reviewing relevant documentation.

Mears Care is a domiciliary care service that provides personal care to people in their own homes within the Leeds area. Mears Care was registered with CQC in September 2017 and this was the first inspection of the service. The service provides care for older people and people living with dementia, mental health, physical disabilities and sensory impairment, learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, older people, people who misuse drugs and alcohol, people with an eating disorder and younger adults. At the time of our inspection there were 183 people using this service.

The service did not have a registered manager due to the previous manager still being registered. CQC were aware of this prior to the inspection and were in the process of cancelling this so the new manager could apply. The manager had previously been a registered manager. 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.

We found a lack of accurate and contemptuous records. Supervisions had not always been recorded, some people had not signed their care plans and audits of these were not consistent. We also found actions taken had not always been recorded when people had raised issues with the provider in quality telephone checks.

Risk assessments had been carried out and staff understood how to support people. However, these lacked details of how to support people and we found one risk assessment had not been completed when restrictive practice was being used.

People using the service told us they felt safe and staff had a clear understanding of how to safeguard people from potential harm or abuse. There was a safeguarding and whistleblowing policy available for staff and they told us they felt confident to raise concerns.

Medicines were managed safely. Some people were prescribed ‘as required’ medicines and we found protocols outlined when these would need to be administered, with body maps to show where creams needed to be applied.

Staffing levels were adequate to ensure visits were carried out. Some visits had been missed due to staff leaving their employment but most people told us they received their regular visits. Staff recruitment was robust and the necessary checks were carried out by the provider to ensure staff were safe to work with people using the service.

The provider operated under the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005), with capacity assessments and best interest meetings carried out.

New staff completed an induction program and training before carrying out personal care. Staff told us they did continuous training to ensure their skills were kept up to date and were supported with supervisions and appraisals. However, we did find that not all of these had been recorded.

People were supported with their nutritional and health needs. The provider ensured staff were trained to support people with specialist needs for example, catheter care.

People told us staff were caring and compassionate. Staff had built fond relationships with people they cared for and visits were consistent to ensure familiarity for people using the service.

Initial assessments were completed and care plans were then carried out. Care plans were individualised and detailed people’s preferences.

People said they were offered choices and encouraged to be as independent as possible. Staff were respectful of people’s diverse needs and for privacy. People said