This was an announced inspection which took place on the 28 September 2016. We gave the service 48 hours notice so there would be someone present to support the inspection. This was the services first inspection since re-registration in August 2013.

United Response Huddersfield is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care to people living in their own homes. The service supports adults and older people with physical and learning disability support needs. The service varied from supporting a number of people to live independently in a shared tenancy, to one to one support to access community services or gain independence skills.

The service had a registered manager who had been registered since 2013. 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 found that people’s care was delivered safely and in a manner of their choosing, or in their best interests. People were supported in a manner that reflected their wishes and supported them to remain as independent as possible or to develop further independence.

Where the registered manager had identified issues relating to their delayed response to a complaint they had taken steps to ensure this issue was addressed. We saw that where people had complained action had been taken and improvements were being made to the service offered.

Staff told us and records showed us they were trained and inducted well into their new roles, or when they were to work with a new person. They felt they had been supported and mentored effectively and people and staff were matched by the service to assist in delivering a personalised service.

People’s medicines were managed well. Staff watched for potential side effects and sought medical advice as needed when people’s conditions changed. People were supported to self-manage their own medicines if they wished.

Staff felt they were well trained and encouraged to look for ways to improve on their work. Staff told us they felt valued and this was reflected in the way they talked about the service, the registered manager and the people they worked with.

People who used the service were matched with suitable staff to support their needs, and if people requested changes these were facilitated quickly. Relatives were mostly complimentary of the service, and were usually included and involved by the staff. They felt the service provided met some complex needs. We noted that some people thought communication could be improved when new senior staff were appointed, the registered manager agreed to review this in future.

There were high levels of contact between the staff and people, seeking feedback and offering support to people. People’s relatives felt able to raise any questions or concerns and felt these would be acted upon.

When people’s needs changed staff took action, seeking external professional help and incorporating any changes into care plans and their working practices. Staff worked to support people’s long term relationships. People thought that staff were open and transparent with them about issues and sought their advice and input regularly.

The registered manager was seen as a good leader, by both staff and most relatives of people using the service. They were trusted and had created a strong sense of commitment to meeting people’s diverse needs and supporting staff. External professionals felt that people’s needs were supported effectively by a person centred service.