Nayland Care Agency Limited.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection there were 130 people receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

The management team told us they were aware of the Right support, right care, right culture guidance and considered this in line with the care provided. The service had ensured staff were provided with training in supporting people who have a learning disability and autistic people.

Staff received training in how to meet people's needs, this included training in people's diverse needs, such as dementia. Staff were observed in their work practice and received support and guidance in their work role.

Systems were in place to reduce the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Lessons were learned when things went wrong, and these were shared with staff. People were supported with their medicines, where required and staff were trained, and their competency checked to reduce risks. Staff were recruited safely and there were sufficient numbers of staff to ensure care visits were completed. Staff received training in infection control and had access to personal protective equipment (PPE).

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Prior to using the service, people's needs were assessed, and these assessments were used to inform their care plans and risk assessments, which were kept under review. People's care records identified the care and support people required to meet their assessed needs and the service delivery was monitored

by the management team to ensure the care plans were being followed.

People were supported by staff who were in the majority caring and compassionate. We received some comments from people and relatives where improvements could be made in individual staff member's approach. However, we were assured the management team were monitoring and assessing the care provision and any concerns identified were addressed.

People's independence, dignity and privacy was being respected. People were asked for their views about the service and their comments were listened to and acted on. This included their decisions about their care and, where required, their end-of-life support.

The management team had systems in place to monitor and assess the service, which supported them to identify shortfalls and address them. The management team were committed to providing high quality care and continued to improve.