This inspection took place between the 5 & 10 January 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service; we need to be sure that people would be available.

Southern Housing Group DCA provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the agency was providing a personal care service to 50 people with a variety of care needs, including people living with physical care needs, learning disabilities, mental health needs and memory loss.

The agency 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 and their families told us they felt safe and trusted the staff who supported them. Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities and knew how to prevent, identify and report abuse. Risks relating to the health and support needs of the people and the environment in which they lived were assessed and managed effectively.

Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks were undertaken, which helped make sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in their own homes. There were sufficient numbers of care staff to maintain the schedule of visits.

Staff were knowledgeable and received appropriate training to support people. They completed an induction programme and were appropriately supported in their work by supervisors and managers. Medicines were given safely by staff who were suitably trained.

Staff knew the people they provided care to well and understood their physical and social needs. Staff were able to describe how to meet people’s needs effectively. Staff referred people to healthcare professionals when required.

Staff, and the registered manager, knew how the Mental Capacity Act 2005 affected their work. They always asked for consent from people before providing care.

People told us they were cared for with kindness and compassion. People received personalised care and support that met their individual needs. Care plans provided comprehensive information to enable staff to provide care in a consistent way. People and their families told us they felt the service was well-led. There was a clear management structure in place and staff understood the role each person played within this structure. Staff felt well supported by the management team. Staff were motivated and enjoyed working at the service.

The provider sought and acted on feedback from people. There was a suitable complaints policy in place and people knew how to complain.

We spoke with the manager and two deputy managers, five care staff and four people using the service. People we spoke with told us they were well cared for. One person said regarding the staff “they get top marks”.

People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered according to those needs. Staff we spoke with were aware of people’s needs and how to support them.

Staff were supported by appropriate training and supervision. The provider had quality assurance procedures in place to ensure the standard of care was maintained.

We spoke with six people who used the service, or their family members. People told us that they had been involved in planning their care, and that they had copies of their care plans in their homes. Care plans were written in a way that promoted people’s independence and respected their dignity.

People we spoke with told us that care was delivered in a way which met their needs. One person said, “I think staff are brilliant”. An independent health professional told us that the quality of care provided by the service was “excellent”. The service had made arrangements to deal with foreseeable emergencies, including adverse weather.

We spoke to five members of staff, including the manager. All staff had received training in safeguarding and demonstrated a good understanding of the principles. There were appropriate arrangements in place for handling people’s money.

Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff started work, including references and Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks. People were asked their views about how the service was delivered, and the provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service.