Archived: Mountfitchet House

Updated 24 December 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This unannounced inspection took place on 1 December 2015 and was completed by two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also looked at the number and type of notifications submitted to the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

During the inspection we spoke with twelve people living at the service, nine relatives, the registered manager, the regional director, clinical governance manager, deputy manager, two nursing staff, one senior and two care staff and the chef. We also spoke with a visiting GP.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also observed other people’s care to assist us in understanding the quality of care people received.

We looked at three people’s care records, the minutes of residents’, managers’ and staff meetings. We looked at medicine administration records and records in relation to the management of the service such as health and safety checks and records. We also looked at staff recruitment, supervision and appraisal process records, training records, and complaint and quality assurance records.

Updated 24 December 2015

Mountfitchet House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 60 people who require nursing and personal care. At the time of our inspection there were 42 people living at the service. The service is located in the town of Mountfitchet close to local shops, amenities and facilities. Off road parking is provided as well as accessible premises for people, staff and visitors. Access to the accommodation is provided by stairs or a passenger lift to all floors of the purpose built two storey building. There are four individual units and a total of 60 single occupancy rooms with en suite wet room facilities. Bathing facilities are available for people with this preference.

This was the first inspection of this service since it first registered in October 2014. This unannounced inspection took place on 1 December 2015.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Staff were only employed at the service once all appropriate checks had been completed. These checks helped the provider determine staff’s suitability for either a nursing or care role working with people living in the service. There were a sufficient number of suitably experienced staff working at the service. An effective induction process was in place to support new staff including nurses. This included an assessment of staff’s overall suitability for their chosen role.

Staff with medicines administration responsibilities supported people to take their prescribed medicines safely. Staff received regular medicines administration training and an assessment of their competency to do this safely. Staff knew the reporting procedures for any concerns they had, or may have had, about people’s safety.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. The registered manager and staff were knowledgeable about when an assessment of people’s mental capacity was required. They had determined people’s lack of mental capacity and applications had been made to, and acknowledged by, the local authority. This was to lawfully deprive some people of their liberty in a lawful way. People’s care was provided where it was in their best interests.

Staff understood and were attentive to people’s needs and supported people in a compassionate manner. Staff knew what was meaningful and important to people. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff who ensured they had gained permission to enter people’s rooms.

People were involved in planning their care. People’s care plans and records were regularly reviewed and updated accordingly. The registered manager provided people with information on accessing independent advocacy if any person required this support.

People were supported with their health care needs. This was by the most appropriate, or a combination of, health care professionals such as speech and language therapist or GP. Health care professional advice was adhered to by staff. Prompt action was taken in response to the people’s changing health care needs. Up-to-date risk assessments to help safely support people with risk to their health were in place and these were kept under review according to each person’s needs.

People were supported to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. This was with sufficient quantities of food, drinks and snacks for people to access whenever they wanted. This included those people at an increased risk of malnutrition, dehydration or weight loss. Pureed and soft food diets and choices were available and provided.

People were given various opportunities to make key suggestions about any aspects of their care they wanted to make changes to. Staff responded promptly to and recognised when a person was concerned about issues which affected their day-to-day life at the service.

A range of effective audit and quality assurance procedures were in place. These were used as a means of identifying areas for improvement and also where good practice had been established. Information was shared through a range of forums including residents’, managers’ and staff meetings.

Staff were supported with their personal development by managers who kept themselves aware of the day to culture in the service. The registered manager supported staff as well as engaging with people on a day to day basis.