JAC Community Care

People felt staff had the skills and experience to care for and support them. However, staff had not received refresher training as identified by the provider. People were supported where required to eat and drink sufficient amounts to remain healthy and were supported to access healthcare professionals when required. People told us staff obtained their consent before supporting them with care and support. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us staff were kind, friendly and caring. Staff supported people to maintain their independence and to remain involved in decisions about their care. People told us they were involved in their care planning and staff made sure they respected people's dignity and privacy.

People received personalised care from staff who knew their needs and wishes. Staff and the provider were responsive to people's individual needs and tailored the service where possible to support people. People knew who to make complaints to and were confident they would be listened to.

The registered provider did not have robust quality assurance systems or processes in place at the time of the inspection. They told us the service was very small and they did some of the care delivery themselves so had an overview of the service. However, there were no records or systems to verify any quality checks or audits. People told us they thought the service was well-led by approachable providers who went the extra mile to support them.