CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mountearl
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed and managed, staffing levels were sufficient, and infection control arrangements were in place, although some as-needed medicine records needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear management oversight, regular quality checks and an open culture. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views, and the service worked with other agencies.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care, with some improvement needed in recording as-needed medicines.
This was an unannounced inspection on 24 January 2023. Two inspectors spoke with staff and managers, reviewed care records, staff files, medicines and other records, and received feedback from relatives.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, clear risk assessments, safe premises and good infection control arrangements.
People were supported to make choices, take part in their care and maintain their health. Inspectors found that managers carried out regular checks and acted on improvements. They did identify that records for some as-needed medicines were not always clear.
Risk management
Risks relating to areas such as community support, falls, choking and distress were assessed and managed. Incidents were investigated and lessons were used to reduce the chance of them happening again.
“Risks to people were clearly assessed and managed.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. Recruitment files contained the checks needed to help ensure staff were suitable.
“The provider undertook pre-employment checks to ensure only suitable staff were recruited.” from the report
Management oversight
The registered manager carried out regular checks, identified areas for improvement and took action. Notifications and duty of candour responsibilities were also understood.
“The registered manager carried out regular quality checks to ensure areas for improvement were identified and promptly took action.” from the report
Choice and involvement
People and those important to them were involved in planning care and reviewing goals. Staff supported people to have choice and control and to take part in their own health and wellbeing.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report
As-needed medicine records
needs fixingRecords did not always clearly show when people were prescribed as-needed medicines. The manager had identified this through an audit, and inspectors were satisfied with the immediate response.
“where people were prescribed PRN 'as and when required' medicines, this was not always clearly recorded on people's medicines administration records (MAR).” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every as-needed medicine is clearly recorded on the medicines administration record?
- 02What changes were made after the medication audit identified gaps in the records?
- 03How will staff support my relative's individual communication needs and recognise when they are distressed or overwhelmed?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing care plans and personal goals?
- 05How are risks such as falls, choking or support in the community assessed and reviewed for my relative?
This was an unannounced inspection that rated Safe and Well-led; the report does not give separate ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 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.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a targeted COVID-19 inspection.
The inspection took place on 11 February 2022 and was announced 24 hours in advance. It was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and any COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
The home had seven people living there and could support up to nine people with mental health conditions and learning disabilities. Inspectors found checks for visitors, vaccination monitoring, regular testing, suitable supplies of personal protective equipment and clear signs about infection control.
Inspectors said they were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, following shielding and distancing rules, and managing visiting arrangements. They did not give a rating because this was a targeted inspection.
Visitor screening
The home used entry checks, including temperature checks, vaccination confirmation, screening forms and protective equipment checks.
“Comprehensive procedures were in place upon entry to the home.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors found sufficient supplies of protective equipment, monitoring of stocks and stations in busy areas.
“Sufficient PPE stocks were in place with regular monitoring and access to additional supplies as and when needed.” from the report
Testing and vaccination checks
The home regularly monitored vaccination status and carried out testing for people and staff in line with government guidance.
“Systems in place ensured people and staff vaccination status were regularly monitored.” from the report
Maintaining relationships
The visiting process included screening areas and followed the guidance in place at the time, helping people maintain important relationships.
“This meant people were able to maintain relationships with people that were important to them.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitor screening, testing and protective equipment arrangements working now?
- 02How do you monitor vaccination status and testing for people, staff and visiting professionals?
- 03What measures are currently used when there are COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 04How can relatives visit, and what happens if infection risks or outbreaks arise?
- 05Are protective equipment supplies and infection control checks regularly reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 April 2022 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 Mountearl
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2014.
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 Lambeth
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. 76 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”
“She is just one of those people that looks around, sees what needs to be done and does it.”
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.