You are here

Reports


Review carried out on 8 July 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Mullion on 8 July 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about The Mullion, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 12 October 2017

During a routine inspection

The Mullion provides accommodation, care and support for up to three adults who have a learning disability.

This inspection took place on 12 October 2017 and was announced 24 hours in advance to ensure someone would be at the home.

At the last inspection on 30 June 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

There was a friendly atmosphere in the home and staff supported people in a kind and caring way that took account of their individual needs and preferences. People and their families were supported to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their care and support.

There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns to the management team.

Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home. There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained, supervised and appraised. There was an induction, training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People received regular and on-going health checks and support to attend appointments. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what they said. Staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health and people were referred to health professionals when needed. People could be confident that any concerns or complaints they raised would be dealt with.

We received positive feedback about how the service was managed. A new manager had been in post since May 2017 and had applied for registration. There was an open and inclusive culture within the service. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.

Inspection carried out on 30 June & 1 July 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection visit took place on 30 June and 1 July 2015. The inspection was announced 24 hours in advance because the service was a small care home for younger adults who are often out during the day.

The Mullion provides accommodation, personal care and support for up to three people who have learning disabilities. There were three people using the service at the time of this inspection.

The service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We observed the care and support provided to people to help us understand their experiences of the service. We also spoke with their relatives who told us they felt the service provided safe care and support. There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm, including how medicines were managed. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns to the management team.

Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home. There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to meet people’s needs.

Staff were supported to provide appropriate care to people because they were trained, supervised and appraised. There was an induction, training and development programme, which supported staff to gain relevant knowledge and skills.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. Where people’s liberty or freedoms were at risk of being restricted, the proper authorisations were in place or had been applied for.

People received regular and on-going health checks and support to attend appointments. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices about what they ate.

Some areas of the home were in need of repair and redecoration and there were plans in place to ensure the home environment continued to meet people’s needs.

The atmosphere throughout the home was friendly, calm and caring. The staff spoke about people in a respectful manner and demonstrated understanding of their individual needs.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what they said. Staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health and people were referred to health professionals when needed. People were confident they could raise concerns or complaints and that these would be dealt with.

Relatives spoke positively about how the service was managed. There was an open and inclusive culture within the service, which encouraged people’s involvement and their feedback was used to drive improvements. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.

Inspection carried out on 21 June 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke to two care staff, the acting manager and one relative. We met all three of the people living in the home; due to their disability and communication needs we were not able to ascertain their views verbally. However, we spent time observing their care and support. We saw that they looked happy and well cared for. We observed staff interacting with them in a friendly, relaxed manner and also treating them with respect. People moved freely around the home were seen communicating their needs to staff who responded appropriately.

We saw that care plans were not kept under regular review and some were dated 2011 and 2012. This had been picked up the quality auditing system with a target date set for the end of July 2013

We saw that most of the improvements to the environment that we asked for at the last inspection had been addressed.

There were processes in place to ensure that medicines were stored and administered safely. Only trained and competent staff attended to this.

Staff told us they enjoyed their jobs and they thought the home was well run. They knew the people they supported well and showed a good understanding of their needs and wishes.

Inspection carried out on 5 December 2012

During a routine inspection

The people living at The Mullion were not able to give us their views verbally. We spent time with two people in the lounge and one person in their bedroom. We also observed them moving around the home. We saw that they were happy and relaxed and interacted positively with the staff supporting them.

We met two casual staff, one permanent member of staff and the acting manager. All staff were kind, friendly and respectful to the people they were supporting. The casual staff were employed from a "bank" of staff recruited and trained by the organisation. They knew people well and said they had received appropriate training as well as on going support.

Inspection carried out on 13 January 2011

During a routine inspection

We did not, on this occasion, seek the views of people using the service.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)