Friary Court is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own flats within an extra care scheme in Peterborough. At the time of our inspection a service was being provided to older people, people living with dementia, people living with mental health conditions and people living with physical disabilities or sensory impairment. There were 28 people receiving personal care from the service and this included six flats used for rehabilitation that were provided in partnership with rehabilitation services run by the local authority. There were 20 care staff employed at the time of this inspection.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 21 and 22 June 2017 and was unannounced.

There was no registered manager in place. The registered manager deregistered on 26 June 2017. A new manager was in post but they had not registered with the commission at the time of the inspection. 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 provider's policy on administration and recording of medication had been followed by staff. Audits in relation to medication administration had been completed but were not robust, as they did not always identify all areas of improvement required.

People had had their needs assessed and reviewed so that staff knew how to support them and maintain their wellbeing. People's care plans contained person centred information. Staff treated people with care and respect and made sure that their privacy and dignity was respected all of the time.

There was a system in place to record complaints. These records included the outcomes of complaints and how the information was to be used by staff to reduce the risk of recurrence.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and could describe how people were supported to make decisions. Training had been provided by the service and staff were aware of current information and regulations regarding people’s consent to care. This meant that there was a reduced risk that any decisions, made on people's behalf by staff, would not be in their best interest and as least restrictive as possible.

The provider had a recruitment process in place and staff were only employed in the service after all essential safety checks had been satisfactorily completed. Training was available for all staff which provided them with the skills they needed to meet people’s health and wellbeing requirements.

People were involved in how their care and support was provided. Staff checked people’s health and welfare needs and acted on issues identified. People were supported to access health care professionals when they needed them. People were provided with a choice of food and drink.

People and staff were able to provide feedback and information. There were systems in place to monitor and audit the quality of the service provided. However, some audits were not effective and this meant that the provider was not always able to drive forward any necessary improvements.

Staff meetings, supervision and individual staff appraisals were completed regularly. Staff were supported by the manager, a team leader and a senior carer during the day. An out of hours on call system was in place to support staff, when required.