Mountbatton Care Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety. Systems were in place to record and monitor accidents and incidents. Staff understood the process for reporting and recording safety related events which occurred. Events were reviewed on a regular basis by the registered manager alongside other members of the management team and records were maintained of actions taken in response to events which occurred to improve the safety of the service.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Systems were in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff received training and understood the actions to take if they felt someone was being harmed or abused. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. They made referrals to the local authority safeguarding team when abuse had been suspected, and investigations were completed. People told us they felt protected from the risk of abuse or harm. One person told us, “I feel safe with my care, [Staff] do know what they are doing.” This comment was supported by a family member who said, “I have no concerns about the care. We can relax when staff are here. I have confidence in the staff.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Risk assessments had been completed, and personalised care plans had been developed to mitigate risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing. People were involved in the development of their care plans in areas such as moving and handling, continence and in relation to their individual health conditions. Staff received specific training around people’s needs to ensure they delivered care which was safe and effective. Regular reviews were undertaken with people which meant they were able to discuss any changes in their care needs.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development opportunities. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Staff were safely recruited and inducted; appropriate checks had been made before applicants were offered employment. Staff received appropriate training which included training to effectively support people with a learning disability and autistic people. A family member described staff as “Well-trained, friendly and competent.” There were enough staff to meet peoples planned care visits and people told us they did not feel rushed when being assisted with care. A person told us, “[Staff] are great, and they chat away. They don’t rush and spend time talking to me. I have no concerns.” A family member spoke of the positive impact staff had on their loved one. They commented, “[Name] speaks to the staff. They didn’t with the last company. [Name] is in significant pain and used to dread carers coming. [Name] looks forward to them now. The staff are all lovely.” People told us staffing was consistent and reliable, and staff stayed as long as was needed to meet their care needs. One person told us, “[The provider] will ring me if they are going to be late.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. Medicines were administered by appropriately trained staff who knew people well. Accurate and detailed records were maintained. Medicines were stored according to people’s needs and people were encouraged to be as independent as possible in the management and administration of their medicines. Several people received support from family members to take their medicines, and we found care plans clearly recorded this. Where people required medicines support from staff, we found care plans contained detailed guidance about the level of support required such as applying topical creams to people skin.