Mountside Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People told us, “They do plan everything how I like it, I’ve not been here that long but it’s fine. Staff listen and change certain things if I struggle or am not happy,” “They have literally been so lovely, they know me so well even though I have not been here that long,” and “I know I have a care plan that they discuss with me.”

Everyone had a pre-assessment before moving into Mountside Residential Care Home to confirm that the home could meet their expectations, wishes and needs. On admission, staff recorded each person’s preferences and life history and completed a ‘getting to know me’ section. This helped staff build positive relationships with people as they settled in.

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs, routines and preferences. Staff understood how each person wanted to be supported and used this information to provide personalised care. Records showed that people and, where appropriate, their relatives were involved in care planning and reviews when needs changed.

Staff supported people with consideration and respect for their individual needs. For example, people spending time in their rooms appeared comfortable and were surrounded by personal belongings. Staff played their preferred music or television programmes, interacted positively with them and used their preferred names. At mealtimes, people chose where to sit. Staff provided prompts or assistance with eating when needed and supplied adapted cutlery where appropriate.

People said they were involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Relatives reported good communication and said staff understood people’s needs. They described staff as compassionate and respectful. One relative told us, “They focus on the person; I know they try to involve my loved one in their care, but it’s a little difficult now as their memory is poor.” This helped ensure that people received care aligned with what mattered to them.

Activities that enriched people’s lives were an important part of life at Mountside Residential Care Home. The activity person was enthusiastic and knew people well. She organised entertainment that was enjoyed by people. She considered people’s previous interests and hobbies when planning activities. Relatives said staff used an encouraging and skilled approach that helped their loved ones participate in activities and supported their social lives and wellbeing. This enabled people to take part in meaningful activities suited to their needs, preferences and abilities. Visitors told us, “There is always something happening; they do lots of different things,” and “They love the singing and bingo, activities here are good.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Relatives felt well informed and confident specialist advice would be sought promptly.

Staff worked with families, recorded appointments and advice, and kept relatives informed. Care plans reflected people’s assessed needs, routines and support arrangements and were reviewed when needs changed. Handovers, care records and daily communication kept staff informed of people’s current needs, preferences, risks and changes in presentation.

The service worked with relatives, unpaid carers and external professionals to maintain continuity of care. Records showed people accessed healthcare when needed and relevant information was shared to support joined-up care. A health professional said, “Staff are professional and polite. They know residents well and contact us when needed.”

Staff understood the Equality Act and described how they supported people fairly in care and decision-making.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

All care plans were computerised, and this enabled them to be printed off for family, hospital appointments and transfers. They could also be enlarged for those that have sight impairment.

Since 2016 onwards all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The standard was introduced to make sure people are given information in a way they can understand. The standard applies to all people with a disability, impairment or sensory loss and in some circumstances to their carers. Communication needs were assessed and recorded within individual communication care plans. These included specific information on how people’s communication needs could be met and what aided their communication. For example, for those whose sight was impaired. Care plans explained how staff should assist each person and support them to remain safe while navigating their surroundings.

Systems to support people to communicate with staff, relatives and friends had been assessed and promoted. For example, staff supported people to phone their loved ones as necessary. One visitor confirmed that staff helped their relative contact them.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.
People told us they were asked for their views and felt listened to. Relative, resident and staff meetings took place and there were opportunities to feedback regularly. Feedback and actions proposed and taken were then discussed at the next meeting.

There was a complaints policy and procedure, we saw that concerns raised had been responded to promptly and thoroughly. The management team kept a log that ensured the manager had an overview. They told us they had an open-door policy, and we saw people and relatives popping in to speak to the manager to share information and ask questions. Relatives told us, “Never felt I couldn’t talk to staff if I had a concern or worry.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Families and staff confirmed people were able to access care, treatment and support when they needed to. One visitor said, “No complaints at all, they act on my relative’s behalf and I think it’s the same for everyone.”

There was evidence within peoples care records that when staff identified a health issue, they acted immediately, and people received treatment and care promptly. Staff said, “We ring the surgery for advice if we are worried, someone from the surgery visits weekly, there are no barriers to support and expert advice.”

One staff member said about the environment, “We have an issue with a lift at present, we are waiting for a part but it’s a short term issue, so usually everyone can access all parts of the service safely and they are not restricted at all.”

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People living at Mountside Residential Care Home had a range of needs relating to mobility, communication, cognition, health conditions and sensory needs. Staff were able to discuss and demonstrate an understanding of people’s differences. They told us how they adapted their approach so people could be involved in daily life and receive care in a way that worked for them.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff worked closely with people to plan their future care. People and their families were involved in decisions about end-of-life care and how they wished to be supported. Recognising that some people found these conversations difficult, staff gathered information gradually and added relevant details when it was appropriate.

Care plans recorded people's end-of-life preferences and, where this was their wish, the service coordinated palliative care within the care home. They also included guidance on people's religious beliefs and resuscitation wishes. Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms were in place for most people to help ensure personal wishes were followed. People also had Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, which were accessible to staff and healthcare professionals when needed. Staff discussed DNACPR and ReSPECT forms with people and their families, ensuring they understood their options and the implications of withholding or withdrawing treatment to support a dignified death. Relatives and friends were supported compassionately during this difficult time. For example, visiting arrangements for people approaching the end of life were extended.