CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mount Pleasant Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, risk management, medicines and infection control were judged safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive feedback about the manager, regular quality checks, staff meetings and systems to involve people, relatives and staff in improvements.
What inspectors found, December 2021
Rated Good; the focused inspection found people were safe and the home was well led, despite recruitment pressures.
Inspectors visited without warning on 26 October 2021. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and other professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The inspection was prompted by concerns about staffing levels, meeting people's needs safely and record keeping. Inspectors found enough staff were deployed to keep people safe. They found safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, well-managed medicines and good infection control, including COVID-19 arrangements.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only. Both areas were rated Good, and the overall rating remained Good. Ratings for the other areas were carried over from the previous full inspection because they were not inspected this time.
Safe staffing arrangements
Although the home was recruiting more care staff, inspectors found enough staff on each shift to keep people safe. Recruitment checks had also been completed.
“Enough staff were deployed to keep people safe.” from the report
Good safeguarding and risk management
Staff were trained to recognise and report abuse. Care plans, risk assessments and emergency plans were in place and followed.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Medicines and infection control
Medicines systems were organised, and staff were trained and checked as competent. Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control arrangements.
“Systems to manage medicines were well organised and ensured safe and timely administration of medicines to people.” from the report
Strong management oversight
The manager was viewed positively by relatives and staff. Audits, meetings and an electronic care system were used to monitor care and identify improvements.
“Quality audits were in place to measure the success of the service and to drive improvement.” from the report
Recruitment pressure
needs fixingThe home was trying to recruit more care staff and was relying on agency staff and additional hours from existing staff. Inspectors found enough staff at the time of the visit, but staffing remains an important point to ask about.
“The provider was actively recruiting more care staff to increase the number of staff available to be deployed.” from the report
Staff morale
minorSome staff said they would like more appreciation from the company to improve team morale. This did not change the Good well-led rating.
“some staff told us they felt this could be improved by the company to raise team morale.” from the report
- 01How many care staff are currently employed, and are you still relying on agency staff or extra hours?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough staff on every shift to meet residents' individual needs?
- 03How has the electronic care recording system worked since the inspection, and how do managers check for missed care tasks?
- 04What action has been taken to improve staff morale and keep experienced staff?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous full inspection?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 December 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, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some people saying meals could be warmer.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 11 June 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, visitors and staff. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, accident, recruitment and training records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, supported with medicines, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care.
People enjoyed the food overall and received support with eating and drinking. However, some people on the first floor said their meals could be warmer. The home said it would investigate this.
The overall rating stayed Good, as it was at the previous inspection in December 2016. The Effective rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good because staff had received additional training to support people living with dementia.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found that staff understood safeguarding, risks were assessed and medicines were given safely. Recruitment checks and infection control procedures were also in place.
“People were supported to take their medicine at the right time.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy, dignity and people's preferred pace.
“We saw, and people confirmed they were treated with kindness and consideration by the staff team.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people well and care plans reflected individual needs, preferences and changes in support required.
“Staff knew people well and care plans were in place that were personalised, detailed and regularly updated.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to take part in activities based on their interests and to maintain relationships with people important to them.
“The activities provided were based on people's interests.” from the report
Improved staff training
The home had acted on the previous Effective rating by providing training to help staff support people living with dementia.
“At this inspection we saw training was provided to ensure people were supported as needed to keep safe and maintain their wellbeing.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The management team used regular audits and followed up areas needing improvement.
“We saw that all areas for improvement were monitored until completed.” from the report
Meals could be warmer
minorSome people on the first floor said their meals could be warmer because they were served after meals on the ground floor. The manager said this would be investigated.
“Some people that lived on the first floor told us that their meals, "could be warmer.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure meals on the first floor are served at a suitable temperature?
- 02How do you check that staff remain competent to give medicines safely?
- 03What training do staff receive to support people living with dementia when they become distressed or their behaviour may put someone at risk?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 05How are residents' suggestions and complaints recorded, acted on and checked?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the Effective rating improved from Requires Improvement and the other ratings remaining Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 July 2019 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 Mount Pleasant Care Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 July 2013.
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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.