CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mantles Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, medicines systems, safety checks and infection control were found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were updated. Inspectors said improvements were needed when people joined the home in emergencies, so staff had enough information to manage risks.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, patient and respectful. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and have their privacy and dignity respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people were supported with communication, activities, relationships and end of life wishes. Complaints were recorded and responded to promptly.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team used audits and improvement plans and worked with health professionals. Relatives gave mixed feedback about communication with the home.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some communication and assessment improvements needed.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. Inspectors visited without notice, spoke with 17 people, 10 relatives and 15 staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, clean surroundings and good infection control. People were treated kindly and staff knew them well.
The home provided personalised care, activities and support to access health professionals and the local community. Inspectors also found some areas to improve, including information available when people arrived in an emergency, and keeping relatives involved and informed.
Kind relationships
People described staff as caring, patient and respectful. Inspectors saw calm and supportive interactions, with staff taking time to speak with people.
“People received kind and compassionate care from a staff team who knew them well as individuals.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to respond to call bells and provide support without rushing people. Staffing was increased at busy times so staff could spend more time with residents.
“There were enough staff to support people safely and spend time speaking with people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs, preferences and dislikes. Staff supported individual interests, independence and communication needs.
“People received personalised care which met their specific support needs and their preferences.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in activities such as cinema, gardening and exercise. Staff also supported people to go out into the local community.
“The registered manager and staff team had a passion for supporting people to leave the service and go out.” from the report
Improving management
The manager and staff used audits, feedback and improvement plans to identify and address issues. Inspectors found that changes had led to better outcomes.
“These were effective in identifying where improvements could be made and actions were taken in a timely fashion to make these improvements.” from the report
Emergency admissions
needs fixingAssessments could be improved when people arrived in an emergency, so staff had enough information to manage risks. The manager explained how this would be improved.
“However, improvements could be made when people joined the service in emergencies to ensure staff had enough information to manage risks to people.” from the report
Relative involvement
needs fixingRelatives gave mixed feedback about being involved in decisions and care plan reviews. The manager said this would be revisited.
“Relatives gave us mixed feedback about how involved they were in decision making about their family members support such as involvement in reviews of care plans.” from the report
Communication with relatives
minorSome relatives said communication was inconsistent, particularly about how their family member was doing when there had not been an incident.
“The communication can be a bit hit and miss.” from the report
Drinks availability
minorSome relatives said drinks were not always readily available, although inspectors did not see this during the visit. The manager said this would be monitored more closely.
“Some relatives told us, drinks were not always readily available for people, however we did not observe this to be the case.” from the report
- 01What information do staff receive when someone arrives in an emergency, and how do you check that risks are understood?
- 02How will you involve relatives in care plan reviews and decisions about their family member's support?
- 03How often will you update relatives about their family member when there has not been a fall or other incident?
- 04How do you check that drinks are available throughout the day for everyone who needs them?
- 05Which activities and community outings would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five CQC questions, the care provided and the home premises; relatives were contacted by telephone as part of the inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 July 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Mantles Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 November 2021.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Central Bedfordshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She handled the new situation in front of her with such professionalism and I felt I could trust her 100%.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.