This was the provider's first inspection since their registration in December 2015. Rose Care Services Ltd is registered as a Shared Lives scheme and to provide personal care for people in their own homes. At this inspection on 14 June 2017 one person was using the Shared Lives scheme and had been since March 2017. The service employed one Shared Lives carer (SL carer) who was contracted by the scheme to support people as well as provide them with a place to live.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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 did not find enough information and evidence about parts of the key questions we ask about services, or the experiences of people using the service, to provide a rating to each of the five questions and an overall rating for the service. We were therefore not able to rate the service against the characteristics of inadequate, requires improvement, good and outstanding at this inspection.

At this inspection we found current risks we could identify for people were assessed and monitored. We saw that SL carers and all staff had safeguarding training. We were unable to judge the effectiveness of the service in response to a wider range of possible risks that can occur. Risks in relation to emergencies were identified. However, some improvement was needed to the business continuity plan to ensure it would give staff advice on a full range of possible emergencies. Medicines were not currently being administered and we were unable to judge the effectiveness of the systems available. However, we found the medicines policy needed some improvement to ensure it provided effective guidance for SL carers in all circumstances.

People told us they felt safe, happy and well cared for and their dignity, independence and family links were recognised and respected. People had an individual plan of their care and support needs and this addressed their individual cultural and spiritual needs. People’s needs for stimulation and socialisation were recognised and addressed. People were supported with their nutritional needs and with access to health professional when needed. There was a complaints policy in place although this required some improvement to provide full information to anyone wishing to raise a complaint. The SL carer told us there was always someone available in an emergency if they needed support.

There were effective recruitment processes in place. We saw there was an assessment and matching process including introductory visits to ensure it met people’s needs and all parties were happy to go ahead with the placement. SL carer told us the assessment process was thorough, they had plenty of training and they felt well supported. We were not able to evidence training certificates for all the training provided at this inspection. There were enough staff to meet the current needs of people at the service. Staff were aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty safeguards but we were unable to see this operating in practice.

People told us the service was well managed and we saw there was a system of monitoring visits, calls and unannounced visits to check on the service provided and identify any areas for improvement. There was a comprehensive system to monitor the quality of the service although it was difficult to evidence its effectiveness because of the limited scope of the service at the time of the inspection. We found the provider and registered manager to be open to learning and knowledgeable about their roles.

We were unable to gather sufficient evidence for the key lines of enquiry to provide a rating for each key question and an overall