CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Mornington Hall Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, safety checks, recruitment checks and infection control arrangements were in place, although inspectors recommended improvements to medicines management and received mixed feedback about staffing levels.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before admission and staff received training, supervision and appraisals. People's nutrition, hydration and healthcare needs were supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed kind and respectful interactions. People and relatives were involved in care decisions, and staff promoted privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. The home offered activities, supported communication needs, responded to complaints and recorded people's end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the leadership. The provider used audits, meetings and partnership working to monitor and improve the service, including providing management support at weekends and at night.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Mornington Hall Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but recommended improvements to medicines management.
This was an unannounced inspection over three visits in March and April 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment files, audits and building safety records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received suitable care and support, and were treated with dignity. Care records were detailed, activities were available, and people could take part in decisions about their care.
There were some medicines recording issues. A few medicines did not have opening dates, and some controlled drugs records had unclear corrections. The home acted immediately during the inspection, but inspectors recommended seeking best practice and guidance on medicines management. The previous provider had been rated Requires Improvement in December 2021. Inspectors found improvements under the new provider.
Safe recruitment
The home carried out identity, reference, right to work and DBS checks before employing staff. It also checked nursing staff registration and competence.
“The provider recruited staff safely and carried out relevant recruitment checks before employing new staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw caring interactions. People and relatives described staff as respectful, kind and supportive.
“We observed caring interactions between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Personalised care records
Care records included people's preferences, communication needs, likes and dislikes. Relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
“Care records were detailed, pictorial and contained people's likes and dislikes.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could join in activities such as games, singing, dancing and exercise. The home also supported contact with family and friends.
“We observed people enjoying taking part in activities with the activity co-ordinator including word games, singing, clapping, dancing and chair-based movement to music exercises.” from the report
Leadership and checks
The provider carried out regular audits and meetings. Inspectors found management support was available at all times.
“At this inspection we found the provider had acted on this recommendation.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingA few medicines did not have opening dates, and some controlled drugs records had unclear corrections. The home took immediate action, but inspectors recommended seeking further guidance.
“We recommend the provider seek best practice and guidance around medicine management.” from the report
Mixed staffing feedback
minorSome people and relatives reported waiting for help and feeling that staff were short or rushed. Inspectors observed enough staff during the visit, and the home had bank and agency staff to cover absences.
“I do sometimes have to wait a long time after pressing my buzzer but they do apologise and explain why.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines recording since the inspection recommendation?
- 02How do you check that opening dates are added to medicines and that controlled drugs records are corrected clearly?
- 03How quickly do staff usually respond to call bells, especially during sickness or staff shortages?
- 04How do you make sure there is management support during weekends and night times?
- 05How are residents and relatives involved in reviewing personalised care plans and activities?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home covering all five key questions, including the premises and care provided; it was the first inspection under the new provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 August 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 Mornington Hall Care Home
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2021Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Inspected but not ratedCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 February 2022.
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 Newham
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 £1,190 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She is a safe pair of hands and her years of experience certainly shine through.”
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
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.