What the CQC found at Mount Hall Care Home

People and relatives were generally positive about the support. Regular staff understood people's preferences and wanted to provide good care.

“Overall, people who lived at the service and their relatives spoke highly of the support they received.” from the report

Staff had safeguarding training, medicines training and ongoing updates. New staff had induction training.

“People were supported by staff who had undertaken training and received ongoing updates.” from the report

The home had medicines policies, weekly audits and staff competency checks. Care plans and instructions for medicines were in place for the people reviewed.

“Weekly medicines audits were being undertaken and any issues were addressed in a timely manner.” from the report

Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, use of protective equipment, admissions and the home's ability to manage outbreaks.

“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report

The home assessed capacity, recorded best-interest decisions and had DoLS authorisations where needed. Staff understood the need to obtain consent.

“The service worked in line with the principles of the MCA.” from the report

Some identified safety measures were not followed. This included motion sensors, call bells, equipment storage and mattress settings, which placed people at risk of harm.

“We found no evidence that people had been harmed however, systems were not robust enough to demonstrate safety was effectively managed.” from the report

Safeguarding systems were not always followed robustly, and some concerns had not been referred to the local authority when necessary. Management made the referrals during the inspection.

“Safeguarding concerns had not always been reported to the local authority.” from the report

Different records sometimes gave contradictory information about people's diets and fluids. Fluid and diet records were also not always completed fully.

“There was a risk staff would not have the correct information and people may not receive a suitable modified diet or fluids.” from the report

Although inspectors found overall staffing was sufficient, some people and staff described delays. Staff were seen waiting for colleagues before supporting people.

“We made a recommendation the registered provider reviews how staff are deployed across the service, in line with people's dependency levels and the layout of the building.” from the report

Audits did not identify all the issues found. There were gaps in care records and some incidents did not show whether action had been taken.

“The provider did not always operate effective systems and processes to ensure the safety and quality of the service.” from the report