CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Montbelle Road
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. They found arrangements covering visitors, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection prevention and control arrangements at Montbelle Road.
This was a targeted inspection on 11 February 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and control COVID-19 infections. The inspection was announced and carried out by one inspector.
Inspectors found testing arrangements for people and staff, trained staff, enhanced cleaning and updated infection control training. They also found suitable use of protective equipment and information about reducing infection risks.
Visitors were screened, including COVID-19 testing and temperature checks, and were given protective equipment. People were supported to keep in touch with their families using mobile devices.
The service was inspected but not rated. The safe question was also inspected but not rated. Inspectors said they were assured that infection prevention and control procedures were being followed.
Testing and vaccination
The home had arrangements to test people and staff for COVID-19. Some staff and people had received a first vaccine dose at the time of inspection.
“The home had arrangements in place to test both people and staff for COVID-19, in line with the current guidelines on testing.” from the report
Cleaning and staff training
Inspectors found enhanced cleaning and recent infection control training, including training about COVID-19 risks and protective equipment.
“There was an enhanced programme of cleaning to reduce the risk of infection.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened through testing and temperature checks and were given protective equipment. The home also supported family contact through mobile devices.
“There were appropriate screening procedures and measures in place in place for visitors including testing for COVID-19, checking their temperatures and providing them with PPE.” from the report
Information for people
Information about COVID-19 and reducing infection risks was available in different formats for staff and people to use.
“The service had a range of information about COVID-19 and how to reduce infection risks available in different formats.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people and staff tested for infections now?
- 02How often is enhanced cleaning carried out, and how is it checked?
- 03What infection control training have staff completed recently?
- 04What screening and protective equipment arrangements are currently used for visitors?
- 05How does the home support people to keep in contact with their families?
This was a targeted inspection of COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 2021 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.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Montbelle Road rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but noted gaps in staff training and quality checks.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 April 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with three relatives, the registered manager and two care workers, and reviewed care plans, staff files and service records.
The home supported three people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported according to their individual needs. Medicines, staffing, care plans and complaints systems were managed appropriately.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 15 February 2016.
Inspectors identified two areas to improve. Staff had not received training on the Mental Capacity Act, and the home did not analyse quality checks or record unannounced visits clearly enough.
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, communication needs and abilities. Staff knew how to support each person and update care when needs changed.
“Care plans were very well written and person centred.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm relationships between people and staff. People were offered choices, treated with dignity and supported to have privacy.
“Staff were kind, attentive and spoke in a gentle and pleasant manner to people.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Records showed medicines were given at the prescribed time and stored properly.
“Medicines records were fully completed which indicated people received their medicines at the prescribed time.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to do things for themselves, join activities, pursue interests and work towards personal goals.
“The service encouraged people to have independent lifestyle and quality of life.” from the report
Mental Capacity Act training
needs fixingStaff understood the importance of consent and best-interest decisions, but inspectors found that staff had not received training on the Mental Capacity Act. The manager said this would be addressed.
“However we noted that staff had not received training on MCA.” from the report
Quality monitoring records
needs fixingThe home carried out checks, but did not analyse or summarise the results to identify learning and improvements. Unannounced manager visits were also not recorded.
“However, we found there was no analysis or summary of the findings from the questionnaires or monthly checks conducted to effectively asses, evaluate and identify whether there could be any improvements to the quality of service being provided or learning which could contribute towards continuous working improvement of the service.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed Mental Capacity Act training, and how is their understanding checked?
- 02How do you analyse questionnaires and monthly checks to identify improvements?
- 03Are unannounced management visits now recorded, including any actions needed?
- 04How will you make sure regular bank staff continue to know each person's care needs and preferences?
- 05How are people's personal goals and activities reviewed to check they are still being supported?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with observations, discussions with relatives and staff, and reviews of care plans, staff records and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 June 2018 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 Montbelle Road
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 2011.
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 Greenwich
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 £1,250 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.