About the service: Sterling Standard Care Group is a domiciliary care agency which provides care in people’s homes to people with learning disabilities, younger adults and older people. The services they provide include personal care, housework and assistance with medication. On the day of our visit the service provided care and support to approximately 18 people who received personal care.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service first registered with the CQC in November 2016. This inspection on 20 February 2019 was the first inspection for the service.

People we spoke with told us that they were satisfied with the level of care they received. They told us they had been treated with respect and felt safe with the support they received from care workers. Relatives we spoke with told us they were confident people were safe when being cared for by care workers.

Arrangements were in place in respect of medicines management. Staff had received medicines training and policies and procedures were in place. We looked at a sample of Medicines Administration Records (MARs) and found that these were not always completed fully. Further, where medicines formed part of a blister pack, the medicines were not always detailed on the MARs and therefore it was not clear what medicines had been administered. We discussed this with management and they advised that they would ensure that medicines contained in a blister pack would be clearly recorded on the MAR in future. They confirmed that they would take immediate action in respect of this.

Systems were in place to help ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff records indicated that staff had received safeguarding training and staff confirmed this. Staff were aware of the process for identifying concerns and said that they would report their concerns to management.

Risks to people had been assessed, updated and regularly reviewed to ensure people were safe and risks to people in relation to treatment or care were minimised.

People were protected from the risks associated with poor infection control because the service had processes in place to reduce the risk of infection and cross contamination.

People received care and support from the same team of care workers. This maintained consistency and ensured that staff knew people and could build friendly professional relationships with people. People and relatives spoke positively about this aspect of the service.

People and relatives told us they were confident that care workers had the necessary knowledge and skills they needed to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Staff received a range of training, which they said was useful to their role and responsibilities.

Where people received support around their nutrition and hydration this had been documented clearly in the care plan.

Where possible people were involved in making their own decisions about their care and staff sought appropriate consent from people.

People received care that respected their privacy and dignity as well as promoted their independence wherever possible.

Care support plans were person centred and individualised. They addressed areas such as people’s personal care, what tasks needed to be done each day, time of visits, people’s needs and how these needs were to be met. They also included details of people’s preferences and details of their history and interests.

People and relatives spoke positively about the management of the service. There was a clear management structure in place with the registered manager, team of care workers and office staff.

The service had clear procedures for receiving, handling and responding to comments and complaints. People and relatives told us they did not have any complaints about the service but knew what to do if they needed to raise a complaint or concern.

Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. We found the service had a comprehensive