We carried out a review of the data available to us about Mountview on 6 July 2023. 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 Mountview, you can give feedback on this service.
At the last inspection of Mountview 21 December 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
Mountview had a registered manager in post. 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.
People told us that they felt safe in the service. Staff had been trained in safeguarding people from abuse. Staff demonstrated that they understood the signs of abuse and how to report any concerns in line with the provider’s procedures. People’s needs were met by sufficient number of staff who had undergone safe recruitment checks. Risks were assessed and management plans were developed to mitigate risks identified.
Medicines were administered to people appropriately, clear records were maintained and medicines were stored safely. The environment was safe, clean and hygienic. Staff followed good infection control procedures. Staff kept record of incidents. These were reviewed by the registered manager and actions were discussed with staff so that lessons can be learned.
People’s individual care needs had been assessed and their support planned with input from relevant professionals where required to ensure they are met. Regularly reviews took place to ensure support delivered to people continue to meet their needs.
Staff were trained, supervised and had the skills and knowledge to meet the needs of people. People received food and drinks to meet their nutritional and dietary needs. Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals. People received support to attend health appointments and to maintain good health. The service had systems in place to enable smooth transition when people moved between services. There were suitable facilities and adaptations available for people to use.
People were supported to have maximum 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. Staff understood their responsibility under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Staff understood people’s needs and treated them with respect, kindness and dignity. Staff communicated with people in the manner they understood. Staff supported people to express their views. People’s relatives were involved in their care planning and their views respected.
People received care tailored to meet their requirements and preferences. People were encouraged to follow their interests and develop daily living skills. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. The service provided information to people in an accessible format. People were supported to maintain their religious and cultural values. People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy with the service.
The service sought feedback from people and their relatives and used them to improve the service. Staff received the support, direction and leadership they needed. There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of service provided. The service worked in partnership with external organisations to develop and improve the service.
This inspection took place on 21 December 2015 and was unannounced. At our previous inspection in November 2013, we found the provider was meeting the regulations in relation to the outcomes we inspected. Mountview is a small residential care home that accommodates up to eight people with learning and physical disabilities.
There were appropriate policies and procedures in place that ensured people were kept safe from harm. Staff received training in safeguarding adults and was aware of the potential types of abuse that could occur and the actions they should take if they had any concerns.
Incidents and accidents involving the safety of people using the service were recorded and acted upon and there were arrangements in place to manage foreseeable emergencies. Assessments were conducted to assess levels of risk to people’s physical and mental health and care plans contained guidance for staff that would protect people from harm by minimising risks.
There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to ensure people were kept safe and their needs were met in a timely manner. There were safe recruitment practices in place and appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff started work so that people were cared for and supported by staff that were suitable for their role. Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely.
People were supported by staff that had appropriate skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff were supported through regular supervision, appraisals of their performance and by receiving appropriate training.
There were systems in place which ensured the service complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). This provides protection for people who do not have capacity to make decisions for themselves.
People were supported to eat and drink suitable healthy foods and sufficient amounts to meet their needs and ensure well-being. People were supported to maintain good physical and mental health and had access to health and social care professionals when required.
Staff spoke with people in a friendly and respectful manner and care plans contained guidance for staff on how best to communicate with people. People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends. People were provided with appropriate information that met their needs and were supported to understand the care and support choices available to them.
People received care and treatment in accordance with their identified needs and wishes. Care plans detailed people’s physical and mental health care needs, risks and preferences and demonstrated people’s involvement in the assessment and care planning process.
People’s diverse needs, independence and human rights were supported, promoted and respected. People were supported to seek employment, education and to engage in a range of activities that met their needs and reflected their interests. People and relatives told us they knew who to speak with if they had any concerns.
There was registered manager in place. 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. There were systems in place to evaluate and monitor the quality of the service provided. The provider took account of the views of people using the service through annual resident surveys.
At our inspection on 19 November 2013 we found people using the service were not taking some of the medicines we had seen at our last inspection. We could not therefore assess whether or not the provider had improved its management of these medicines. Where people were taking the same medicines we found the provider was meeting the essential standard.
We did not speak to people using the service at this inspection because of the nature of the compliance action we were following up.
We observed staff being friendly and respectful towards people using the service, and providing care in a gentle and patient way. The atmosphere in the home was relaxed and people using the service were involved and included in the life of the home, for example preparing and eating supper after they returned from their day's activities.
In most respects we found people experienced care that met their needs and were cared for by staff who were supported by the provider to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. However not all arrangements were in place to support people with their medication and protect them from all the risks associated with medicines. We found staff acted in accordance with people's wishes and people were protected from the risk of infection.
People were well cared for and involved in their personal care where possible. People were comfortable with the staff and we observed a high level of interaction. Detailed care plans and assessments were completed for the people and were regularly updated. People were involved in activities in the community such as the local day services.