CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mount Vernon Terrace
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and prompt action, but unsafe medicines, incomplete care records and weak oversight.
Inspectors visited without warning on 5 July 2023. They spoke with people, the manager and staff, and checked care plans, medicine records, recruitment files and other documents. At the time, 12 people lived at the home, but only 2 were receiving personal care covered by this inspection.
The home was caring, with respectful staff, enough staff on duty and suitable training. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and making their own choices. However, medicines were not always managed safely, some care records lacked important guidance, and parts of the building needed work to reduce risks of injury and infection.
The home did not provide enough regular, meaningful activities or enough support to prevent social isolation. Its checks and records did not reliably identify gaps in care plans and other important documents. The overall rating was Requires Improvement, down from Good at the last inspection under the previous provider. The manager acted quickly on several issues, but CQC found breaches of two regulations and will monitor progress.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw positive interactions. Staff promoted privacy, dignity and independence, and people were involved in decisions about their care.
“We observed positive interactions between staff and people who are supported at Mount Vernon Terrace.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were suitable for people's needs. Recruitment checks were in place, and agency staff received an induction.
“There was adequate staffing at all times to meet the needs of the people supported.” from the report
Food and health support
People were positive about the food and helped decide the menu. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and make healthier choices.
“People were involved in deciding what meals were cooked at the home.” from the report
Prompt management response
The manager acted immediately on several issues found during the inspection, including updating care plans and emergency evacuation information.
“The registered manager was quick to act on the risks identified.” from the report
Medicine safety
seriousMedicine administration records did not always match stock counts. Refusals of medicines important to mental health and safety were not always recorded or acted on.
“Medication administration records (MAR) and stock count records did not always align.” from the report
Care plans and risk information
seriousSome care plans lacked clear guidance about changes in mental or physical health, personal care refusals and one-to-one support. This was part of the breach relating to safe care and treatment.
“Care plans lacked some information to guide staff on how best to support people if their mental and physical health deteriorated.” from the report
Building safety and cleanliness
seriousInspectors found damaged furniture, unsecured wardrobes, overloaded plug sockets and some areas that were not fully clean or free from smells. Planned works were in place, but not all risks had been dealt with.
“Some areas of the premises put people at risk of injury, particularly those who were independently mobile.” from the report
Limited activities and social contact
needs fixingThere was little evidence of regular purposeful activity, and people were not supported enough to maintain relationships and avoid social isolation.
“People were not supported to maintain relationships to avoid social isolation.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousThe home's systems did not reliably identify gaps in care plans, outdated documents or risks. This was a breach relating to governance.
“Systems had not been established to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that medicine administration records match stock counts?
- 02What is the process when someone refuses a medicine that is important for their mental health or safety?
- 03How are care plans checked to make sure they contain clear, personalised guidance about risks and support?
- 04What regular activities and support for maintaining relationships are now available?
- 05Which building repairs and cleanliness improvements have been completed, and what work remains?
This unannounced inspection looked at all five CQC questions, but CQC only inspected personal care because only 2 of the 12 people living at the home were receiving it. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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 Mount Vernon Terrace
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- August 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2023
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 May 2023.
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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottingham
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 £1,270 a week. 73 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.