This inspection was completed on 18 April 2017 and was announced. Pembroke Apartments provides domiciliary care services to people within their own homes and within a supported living service. This allows people to reside within a community setting, holding their own individual tenancies. This can include specific hours of required support whilst promoting the person’s independence and well-being. At the time of the inspection15 people using the service received personal care assistance.

The service had 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.

People told us they had been involved in the planning of their care. They felt that the service provided exceptionally responsive care, often going above and beyond what was expected of them. Care plans provided details on how to support people in the way they wanted. This allowed people to remain involved in the management of their support package, and ensured it was effectively delivered. People’s care plans were updated as required, and the staff appropriately made changes.

People told us that they felt safe. Staff were able to explain signs of abuse and what they would do if they suspected anything was wrong. The service had systems in place to ensure sufficient suitably qualified staff were employed to work with people. They were matched to meet people’s needs, in terms of language, knowledge, likes and dislikes. The staff team was consistent, remaining with the provider for long periods of time. This allowed the care to be consistent and people to feel safe with staff.

People received care and support from staff who had the appropriate skills and knowledge to care for them. All staff received comprehensive induction, training and support from experienced members of staff. We were told that the constant presence of management, made certain care was delivered to a high standard. Staff reported feeling supported by the registered manager and the management team. They said they were listened to if they raised concerns, and were kept abreast of any operational changes.

People who could not make specific decisions for themselves had their legal rights protected. People’s care plans showed that when decisions had been made about their care, where they lacked capacity, these had been made in the person’s best interests. Staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, and used the principles when working with people.

People stated that they felt the service was respectful and preserved their dignity and independence. Where possible choice was given and the person was encouraged to complete tasks independently. This promoted well-being for the person.

People were supported with their medicines by suitably trained, qualified and experienced staff. Details were provided on each person’s file on what the medicine was for and how this needed to be administered. Where required, relationships with external health professionals had been developed. This allowed people to receive a good quality of support from staff who were kept abreast of any changes to people’s health needs.

People told us communication with the service was good and they felt listened to. People felt they were treated with respect, with staff preserving their dignity at all times. The service was described as “wonderful” by many of the people we spoke with.

The quality of the service was monitored regularly by the manager, however there was no documentation in place to evidence this. Subsequent to our visit, the manager created paperwork to illustrate when this was completed, allowing a paper trail to be maintained. A quality assurance audit was completed annually with an action plan being generated