Mountview

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to Regulation 11 (Need for consent).

This service scored 71 (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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. The assessments looked at people’s medical conditions, physical and mental health, mobility, nutrition, choices, people’s home environment, daily activities, and personal care needs. Where appropriate, people and relatives were involved in this assessment. This information was used as a basis for developing personalised care plans, to meet each person’s needs.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. The provider was not always working within the principles of the MCA and appropriate legal authorisations. For example, people were assessed as lacking mental capacity, however their relatives had signed the consent form without appropriate authorisation.

The provider failed to provide appropriate mitigation plans to demonstrate people’s best interests had been considered and assessed regarding employees from the provider’s Domiciliary Care Agency business registered at the address having regular access to their home. The provider failed to provide any supporting evidence to show people, and their representatives have consented to access through the home, garden, and garden room by the staff associated with the business operating upstairs within the care home.

Notwithstanding the above, we found where people had been assessed as not having capacity to understand and make decision, staff liaised with health and social care professionals and people’s relatives to make best interests decisions on the person’s behalf, decisions made in their best interests were documented in their care and support records. Staff knew about people's capacity to make decisions and supported them to make decisions using different communication which was tailored to meet people’s individual needs.