You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 2 November 2017

Mobelle provides personal care and support services to older people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the provider was supporting up to 20 people.

The service had a 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.

The provider had basic risk assessments in place which were regularly reviewed, but needed to ensure that more detailed risk assessments were in place when people’s needs changed.

The service had a safeguarding procedure in place. Staff and the provider took safeguarding concerns seriously, but the provider was not aware of their duty to notify the CQC when incidents occurred. Staff we spoke with however demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding issues.

There was a robust recruitment procedure to help ensure the staff recruited were suitable to work with the people using the service.

Staffing levels were sufficient to provide the level of care required by people.

There was a robust induction programme, which included mandatory training, shadowing and buddying with an experienced worker. Staff demonstrated good understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

The service demonstrated a commitment to staff training, which was on-going and regular refreshers were undertaken. Staff were given positive encouragement to undertake further, more specialised training appropriate to the work.

Supervisions were undertaken regularly and considered important in offering an opportunity for discussion between staff and management about on-going work issues. Professional Development Reviews (PDR) were held annually to ensure learning was reviewed and training needs were met.

Care files were clear and comprehensive and contained relevant health and personal information. They were person-centred and included individuals’ goals, wishes and achievements. The service was flexible and responsive to changing needs, desires and circumstances.

Confidentiality was respected and independence was promoted.

Communication with relatives was on-going throughout the duration of their relative’s involvement with the service. Feedback was regularly sought from families and users of the service.

Comments were encouraged formally and informally and there was a complaints policy in place.

Team meetings were regularly undertaken, giving staff the opportunity to discuss any issues and to share good practice examples.

A number of audits were undertaken.

Inspection areas



Updated 2 November 2017

The service was always safe.

Risk assessments were in place, but some lacked detailed information of how staff should support people safely. However, the provider took urgent action to update these.

Staff were aware of how to safeguard people from the risk of harm.

There was sufficient staff to meet people’s individual needs safely.

People were supported to manage their medicines safely.

There were robust recruitment systems in place.



Updated 2 November 2017

The service was effective.

People’s consent was sought before any care or support was provided.

People were supported by staff that had been trained to meet their individual needs.

People were supported to access other health and social care services when required.



Updated 2 November 2017

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that were kind, caring and friendly.

Staff understood people’s individual needs and they respected their choices.

Staff respected and protected people’s privacy and dignity.



Updated 2 November 2017

The service was responsive.

People’s needs had been assessed and appropriate care plans were in place to meet their individual needs.

People were supported to maintain their independence and pursue their hobbies and interests.

The provider had an effective system to handle complaints.


Requires improvement

Updated 2 November 2017

The service was not always well-led.

The registered manager was not aware of their responsibility to report concerns to the CQC.

Staff felt valued and appropriately supported to provide a service that was safe, effective, compassionate and of high quality.

Quality monitoring audits were completed regularly and these were used effectively to drive continual improvements.

People who used the service and their relatives were enabled to routinely share their experiences of the service and their comments were acted on.