This inspection took place over two days on 8 and 10 November 2016. We gave the registered manager notice of our visit so that people would be available to speak with us.

We last inspected Selby Domiciliary Care Agency on 29 July 2014 as part of the new inspection process introduced by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), which looked at the overall quality of the service. At that inspection Selby Domiciliary Care Agency was meeting all of the legal requirements. We found the overall rating for this service to be good.

Selby Domiciliary Care Agency is registered to provide personal care to adults with a learning disability. People are supported by staff to live individually in their own homes or in small groups in independent supported living schemes. Different levels of support are provided over the 24 hour period according to people's individual requirements. Before our visit the registered manager told us there were 19 people who were in receipt of personal care from the service.

There was 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 felt safe. Thorough recruitment processes were followed before staff started work. This reduced the risk of unsuitable people being employed.

People were supported by well trained, skilled staff.

We found that people were encouraged to exercise choice and control in every aspect of their lives. Relatives were involved in best interests meetings for people who required additional support with decision making. Any risks were identified and action was taken to minimise these and to reduce the potential risk of harm to people whilst protecting their rights and freedoms.

People had food and drink to meet their needs. People were supported to access their health care appointments to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment.

We observed good relationships existed between people who used the service, relatives and staff. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported. This was confirmed in feedback we received about the service.

People had comprehensive care and support plans in place. These guided staff on people’s preferred approach to meet their care needs. One example of this was how one person liked to take their medicines independently.

People told us they were actively involved in the community and this was helping to improve their access to local services and raise awareness. We were told that members of the police and the fire service had met with people who had specific care needs. This was an important factor in making sure that people did not experience any discrimination and unequal treatment which may result in their needs not being recognised or met in an emergency.

A complaints procedure was in place. People confirmed they knew who to speak to if they had any worries or if they were upset. Relatives said they had not raised a complaint but said they knew how to if needed. They felt they would be listened to and managers would act upon any concerns raised with them.

The provider undertook a range of audits to check on the quality of care provided. People were asked for their views and their comments were used to celebrate success and identify improvements. One example was the reflection days where people could discuss what was working well and what they would like to change. This was a positive way for people to pause and take stock annually, to discuss future goals and aspirations and how they were going to achieve these.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

We inspected Selby Domiciliary Care Agency on 29 July 2014 and the visit was announced.

We last inspected Selby Domiciliary Care Agency on the 14 January 2014. The service was not in breach of the Health and Social Care Act regulations at that time.

Selby Domiciliary Care Agency is registered to provide personal care and support to adults with learning disabilities who live together in rented accommodation. Some of the people who use the service require 24 hour support. There are five individual houses, each with a team of staff. On the day of our inspection nine people were receiving support with personal care.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

We saw there were systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm.

In each of the care records we looked at we saw risk assessments were in place.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff felt supported by their manager. Procedures were in place for the recruitment and selection of staff and appropriate checks had been carried out prior to the staff starting work.

The service had a comprehensive induction process in place for new staff. This meant new staff were supported by the service skills and competencies to meet people's needs. There was a system in place to ensure staff training was current and to ensure staff practice was meeting the standards required by the provider.

We saw documented evidence that people who used the service had access to other healthcare professionals including GP opticians and dentists.

Staff we spoke with talked about their role in a caring and empathetic manner. People who used the service told us staff respected their privacy and dignity.

The provider had a system to monitor and assess the quality of service provision. This feedback gave the people chance to have their say and an opportunity for the provider to improve.

The service managers completed observations of staff practices. This included moving and handling and medication management. This allowed the provider to monitor staff performance.

The manager and service managers completed a number of audits every month. This enabled them to audit the service’s compliance with policies and procedures.

We spoke with four people who used the service at the agency’s office along with managers and four members of staff.

We found that people were included in decisions about how their care was provided and their preferences and wishes respected. People had care plans and risk assessments in place which helped staff to understand and meet people's needs.

People told us they were very satisfied with the support they received. One person said “It’s a joint effort we work together and I get on really well with my support workers.” Another person said “The staff are great, I get the help I need.”

The provider had responded appropriately to allegations of abuse and had appropriate policies and procedures in place which defined what constituted abuse and provided information for staff about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

We spoke with staff who told us that the agency was very supportive, particularly with regards to emergency out of office support. They told us they provided good opportunities for training to equip them with appropriate skills and experience.

There was a complaints procedure in place which included an easy read accessible format for people with communication difficulties.

We spoke with five people who used the service they were able to tell us about their experiences. They said they were 'happy' with the service they received. Two of the people we spoke with told us that they were supported with work in the town. One said, “This is great for me it makes me mix and chat to other people. I feel more confident now.”

We spoke with three relatives of people who used the service, via the telephone. One relative said ”He has a good social life and his days are filled.” We were also told “The staff are very good. We feel he is very safe living there.”

We observed the people who used the service were at ease when the staff members were present in the office. We saw they had good personal relationships and communicated well with other people who used the service.

We spoke with five members of the care team. They told us how they would protect the people they cared for. We saw the service had policies and procedures in place to support the care staff and the people who used the service from actual or potential abuse.

We reviewed the complaints policy. This was in an easy read format so all people were aware of how to raise concerns if they wished. We saw the service annually reviewed people’s ‘satisfaction’ of the service.

People told us that they were happy with everything. Some people were able to tell us how they were involved with their care. One person told us 'I choose Mencap because I get the support I need, it is a fantastic service.

People told us they were well looked after. One person said, ' It is a good service' and another person said 'everything is fine I am quite happy with everything.'

We did not discuss cleanliness and infection control, medication or supporting staff with people who receive a service from the agency. Although one person we spoke to confirmed that they were able to manage their own medication with minimum support from staff.

People we spoke to told us that staff from the agency were all very good. They told us that they were happy with the care they receive from the agency. People said, 'I get fantastic support from staff, everything is fine you cannot improve anything' and 'staff are all right, we have a laugh with them.' and 'staff help us with what you need.