- Care home
Quarry Mount
Assessment report published 19 August 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment 29 June and 2 July.
The inspection was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service sustained a serious injury. This incident is subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken.As a result,this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident.
However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk of falls. This inspection examined those risks.
The service is a care home supporting people with dementia and physical disabilities. At the time of the assessment, 22 people were receiving a regulated activity.
We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disabilityrespect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
The environment did not always promote the delivery of safe and person-centred care. Risks were not always managed safely, including risks relating to falls. For example, falls risk assessments did not contain all relevant information such as when people were prescribed blood thinners. The provider was reviewing staffing levels to ensure staff could always respond to people’s needs promptly.
Choice and independence were not always promoted and people were not always treated as individuals. Governance systems had not identified the shortfalls found during this assessment.
However, staff spoke positively about working for the service and professionals provided positive feedback. Staff worked well together as a team and received regular supervision and support. Leaders were committed to improving the service and were working from a service improvement plan. Leaders were open and responsive to the feedback from this assessment.
We identified 3 breaches of the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, person centred care and governance.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 9 people living at the service and 4 relatives. People told us they felt safe. However, people generally told us they felt there were not enough staff. Comments included, “There is not enough staff around to help when [people] need helping” and “I feel sorry for [staff], I wish I could get up and help.” People and their relatives told us they felt the service was clean. People said their medical needs were met and relatives agreed with this. People knew who to speak to if they had a concern.
People described staff as “very patient” and “lovely”.
People commented that they felt activity provision could improve. Comments included, “I do wish the entertainment had not been altered from weekly to monthly since the new people took over, we miss this” and “Activities have recently dropped quite a bit.”
Some people told us they were not always offered a choice of different meals at teatime, despite their being a menu board with various options recorded. One person said, “We don’t have a choice, it’s a ham sandwich or cheese and tomato.”
People and their relatives spoke positively about the management of the service.