This inspection took place on 08 and 09 October 2018. The first day was unannounced but we informed the service we would be returning on the second day to complete our inspection.

Monica Court is an extra care scheme, there are two other extra care schemes attached to this registration, Mount Carmel and Moore's House. Extra care provide accessible and safe housing for older people who have their own self contained flats and have access to a shared lounge and dining room if they wish.

At the previous inspection in August 2017 we had rated the service as requires improvement in two of the key questions, and overall. This was because we had identified a breach of the regulations in relation to governance. Following this the service had submitted an action plan which identified the actions they planned to take and by when, to ensure the two key questions improved to at least good. We found there had been significant improvements in the areas we had been concerned about and the service was no longer in breach of the regulations.

There were clear safeguarding policies and procedures in place, we could see the service had followed these when required. Staff we spoke with knew what might be safeguarding concerns and how they should raise them. This ensured people continued to be protected from the risk of harm and abuse.

People were supported to manage the risks in their daily lives. Where a person needed support to manage risk there was an assessment which identified the level of risk and a management plan to minimise the potential for harm to occur. People were supported in ways which had the least restrictive impact on their independence.

People living in the service told us they thought there were enough staff to support them safely. Staff we spoke with told us they always had enough time to support people safely, including those needing two people to support them to transfer. Some staff said they would have preferred to spend more time with people.

People who wanted to manage their own medicines were supported to do this safely. There were risk assessments completed to help identify the level of independence a person had, which were reviewed regularly to reflect any changes in a person's needs. Some people were supported by the service to manage their medicines. We found there could be some improvement made in relation to some aspects of this and have discussed this further in the safe domain. We were confident no one had experienced any harm.

There was personal protective equipment including gloves, aprons and hand gel available throughout the communal areas and in individual flats. This ensured people were protected from the risk of infection.

To ensure the service could be confident they could support people effectively, their needs had been assessed before they were accepted into the extra care scheme.

Staff received regular training in all the key areas required. There was additional training available for staff to improve their knowledge around areas of interest.

Supervision was provided regularly in accordance with the services' policy. The registered manager also provided additional themed supervisions when a member of staff needed support to improve their practice.

The team continued to work with their partners in housing, other extra care schemes and community based health professionals to ensure effective communication.

People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing and, where required, had support to maintain their nutrition.

People living in the service told us the staff were kind and caring. Relatives we spoke with also praised the caring attitude of the staff. People were supported to maintain their independence and to make choices about their care. Many people continued to manage their own affairs and come and go from the service when they wished.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans included details about what was important to the per

This inspection took place at Monika Court Extra Care Scheme on the 8 August 2017. The service was newly registered in March 2017 and this was the first time it had been inspected.

Monika Court Extra Care Scheme is the registered provider, however, attached to this registration are two more extra care schemes which are Mount Carmel and Moore’s house. Extra care scheme’s operate in purpose-built properties, which provide accessible and safe housing for older people who are unable to live completely independently. Each person lives in their own flat but has access to a communal room and dining area where their meals are prepared for them if they wish.

At the time of the inspection there was a manager at the service who had been in post since March 2017. 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.

Medicines were not always administered safely and accurate medicines records were not always completed effectively.

People told us they felt safe in their homes and staff had the correct skills to support them safely and effectively with their daily routine. People told us they received their care in line with their care plans and didn’t feel rushed.

Staff were knowledgeable around how to keep people safe and promote positive risk taking. They also knew how to respond to any concerns or safeguarding events, giving examples of when to raise concerns and whom to.

Staff had a sound knowledge around the needs and requirements of the people they supported and understood the importance of ensuring person centred care was delivered. Staff received a suitable amount of training appropriate to their roles and were confident that if additional training was needed this would be arranged.

The service ensured suitable risk assessments were in place to safeguard people using the service and its staff and visitors from risks which may be apparent from people’s household appliances, furniture, floor coverings and cleaning fluids. The service also liaised with the land lord of the scheme to ensure the building was in a good state of repair.

Staffing levels were sufficient to enable safe and personalised care and support to be provided to people using the service. Comments from people using the service and staff supported this.

Recruitment procedures were implemented to ensure appropriate steps had been taken to verify new employee's character and fitness to work. Induction processes ensured staff had the correct amount of support and training prior to commencing the role unsupervised. People we spoke with felt staff were knowledgeable about their support needs and cared for them effectively. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their role and how to support people based on their individual need's and in a person centred way.

People had individual care files containing support plans, risk assessments and other relevant documentation. These records ensured clear information about people's needs, wishes, feelings and health conditions were documented. Daily log sheets were completed to ensure information was communicated between staff and people’s families.

Staff were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the service had systems in place to protect people’s rights. We saw that people's capacity to make their own decisions and choices was considered within the care planning process. This was in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) which provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves.

People we spoke with and staff told us the manager was approachable and we noted there was always a senior person in each of the schemes. An