You are here

Montclair Residential Home Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 3 April 2020

Montclair Residential Home is a care home providing personal care to 15 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. Montclair Residential Home can accommodate up to 15 people in one adapted building, specialising in supporting people living with dementia.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Staff were knowledgeable in safeguarding adults’ procedures and reported concerns appropriately to the local authority and, if required, the police. Risks to people’s safety had been identified and managed. We identified some environmental risks on the day of our inspection and staff took immediate action to address those concerns. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment practices were followed. Staff adhered to infection control procedures and safe medicines management was in place.

Staff received regular training and supervision to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to support people. Staff were aware of people’s dietary requirements and people had access to food and drink throughout the day. Staff supported people to access healthcare professionals and followed advice provided. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. An accessible, clean and homely environment was provided.

Staff had built good working relationships with people. People and the relative we spoke with were complimentary about the staff and felt they were well cared for. Staff were respectful in their interactions with people and spoke to them politely. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity, and supported them to be as independent as possible. People were involved in decisions about their care and staff asked people’s permission before providing support.

People received personalised care that met their needs. Staff were aware of people’s communication methods and spoke clearly to aid understanding. Staff were aware of who was important to people and supported them to maintain those relationships. They provided a range of activities to protect people from the risk of social isolation. The service had reviewed their practices to ensure they were aware of people’s end of life choices and end of life care plans had been developed. A complaints process was in place. People and the relative we spoke with had not needed to make a complaint.

The management team had been reviewed and strengthened since our previous inspection to provide greater oversight and clarity over lead roles. People, their relatives and staff were regularly asked for their feedback about the service and improvements were made in response to the feedback received. The manager had processes in place to review and improve the quality of service delivery. The manager was aware of their CQC registration requirements and submitted notifications about key events as required. They had also ensured that the service’s CQC rating was clearly displayed at the service and on their website.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 18 September 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas



Updated 3 April 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 3 April 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 3 April 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 3 April 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 3 April 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.