We carried out this inspection of Forum Court on 19 September 2016. This was an announced inspection. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice that we would be coming as the service provided domiciliary care, and we wanted to be sure someone would be available.

Forum Court is an extra care housing complex consisting of 59 privately owned apartments in the centre of Southport. Forum Court is a not for profit organisation that is run by an elected board of directors who also live within Forum Court. The Care Quality Commission regulates the personal care service directly provided by Forum Court for a small number of people who live there. Limited car parking is available to the rear of the building and there are gardens at the front of the building. At the time of our inspection there was one person receiving a domically care service totalling three hours per week.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

The person told us they felt safe and liked the staff. Staff we spoke to had a good knowledge of safeguarding and how to recognise signs of abuse. The provider had procedures in place which would help keep people who used the service safe from harm. We could see these procedures were discussed as part of the staff’s induction process.

The provider had risk assessments and care plan in place for the person. This contained all relevant information about the needs of the person.

There was a procedure in place should the staff be required to administer medications, however the person in receipt of care at the time did not require this service.

The person told us there were enough suitably trained staff to meet their individual care needs. Staff were only appointed after a thorough recruitment process. The person told us the staff always conducted the visits when they were expected to do so.

The person’s privacy and dignity was upheld. For example, staff would knock on their door and wait to asked in.

Staff monitored the person’s health and welfare needs by documenting when the person had an appointment, this was discussed with the person with their permission.

The registered manager and staff we spoke with were aware of their roles in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated legislation.

Staff were trained and skilled in all subjects relating to their job roles, such as safeguarding, first aid and manual handling. Some staff were booked on to do refresher training.

Staff said they benefited from regular one to one supervision and appraisal from their manager.

Quality assurance audits were carried out and for people who used the services of the agency their verbal feedback was sought or they completed satisfaction surveys. .

People being supported by the service told us they were very happy with the support provided by the staff team. They made various positive comments such as:

“The staff are lovely, I see them every day”; "We get a good deal, the costing is very good, very reasonable, we get value for money"; "The staff are fine, they look after me and provide what I need"; "The staff are on duty 24/7 which makes me feel safe" and “everything's fine, I've no complaints.”

Various quality assurance checks on the service helped to show systems were in place to ensure that the service was effectively managed and had evidence of being compliant and promoted good practices.

Staff were positive about working for the service and felt they were well supported with their training needs to be able to meet people's individual needs.

We spent time with two people who owned apartments at Forum Court and received a personal care service. We asked about their views and experiences of the service they received. People told us they were very satisfied with the care and support provided to them. One person said, “They [the care workers] are fabulous and I am very happy with the care.” Another person told us the care workers always came on time and were polite and friendly.

Both the people we spoke with said they were always treated with dignity and respect. Both people said they had been involved in the development of their care plans and had signed to confirm they understood and were satisfied with the care to be provided.

The service is referred to as a ‘sheltered housing’ complex. Within the establishment the provider operates as a domiciliary care agency for people who own an apartment and who require personnal care. These people are referred to as ‘owners’ within the service Statement of Purpose and this report.

During this visit we spoke with two owners. They reported extremely positive comments for the care, treatment and support they received form care staff. They told us care staff were “Kind and caring and they were supported by staff for social events also."

Owners told us they felt "Safe and well looked after" at this service.