Archived: The Mount Nursing Home

Updated 15 March 2016

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 inspection took place on 5 January 2016 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of one inspection manager and three inspectors.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included speaking with the local authority contracts and safeguarding teams. We asked the provider to complete 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. The provider had completed this document but had not been asked to return it until 15 January 2016 and our electronic system would not allow them to return it earlier. This document was emailed to us the day after the inspection visit.

On the day of our inspection we spoke with five people who lived at The Mount Nursing Home, three relatives, the registered manager, deputy manager, director, operations manager, clinical lead nurse, six care workers, cook and the housekeeper. Following the inspection we spoke with a research nurse, a GP and four more relatives.

We spent time observing care in the lounge and dining room to help us understand the experience of people using the service who could not express their views to us. We looked around the building including bedrooms, bathrooms and communal areas. We also spent time looking at records, which included; eight people’s care records, four staff recruitment files and records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 15 March 2016

We inspected The Mount Nursing Home on 5 January 2016 and the visit was unannounced. Our last inspection took place on 17 & 19 June 2015. At that time, we found the provider was not meeting the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment, dignity and respect, good governance and staffing. We took enforcement action and found on this inspection some improvements have been made.

The Mount Nursing Home provides nursing care services for predominantly older people and people living with dementia. The home is a converted Victorian property and is located in a residential area overlooking Peel Park. The accommodation comprises of three double bedrooms and the remainder of rooms are single. Five rooms have en suite facilities and there are shared bathroom and toilet facilities on both the ground and first floors. Communal spaces are situated on the ground floor. The service is registered for 40 places. On the day of our visit there were 24 people living at the home and one person was in hospital.

There is a registered manager at the service. 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.

Staff understood how to keep people safe and we found there were appropriate systems in place to protect people from risk of harm.

We saw some improvements had been made to the premises and the registered manager told us these would be on-going. However, we found on-going maintenance issues were not always being identified or rectified.

People told us the cleanliness of the building has improved and we evidenced this during the inspection.

Recruitment processes were robust and thorough checks were completed before staff started work to make sure they were safe and suitable to work in the care sector with vulnerable people. There were enough staff on duty to make sure people’s care needs were met, people told us they liked the staff and found them kind and caring. On the day of our visit we saw staff speaking calmly and respectfully to people who used the service. There were some activities on offer to keep people occupied but people told us they would like more to do.

Staff told us they felt supported and that training was available. However, we found some training and individual supervisions were not up to date.

People told us meals at the home were good. We saw people were offered a choice of meal and drinks and snacks were readily available for people. Staff monitored people’s weights closely and if anyone was losing weight we saw GP’s and dieticians were involved for advice.

We found people had access to healthcare services and these were accessed in a timely way to make sure people’s health care needs were met. Safe systems were in place to manage medicines so people received their medicines at the right times.

We found the service was meeting the legal requirements relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). However, we were informed some people were the subject to a Lasting Power of Attorney for care and welfare, but no evidence of this could be produced.

There were care plans in place for people but these were not always up to date.

We found the management of the home ‘chaotic.’ We found it difficult to access records or to find out which of the management team were accountable for specific tasks. Most of the people we spoke with thought the deputy manager was in charge.

We saw a variety of quality assurance systems had been introduced sine our last visit, however, the registered manager and operations manager acknowledged that these systems were not fully embedded. We found the systems in place were not effective.

At the last comprehensive inspection in June 2015 this provider was placed into special measures by CQC. This inspection found that there was not enough improvement to take the provider out of special measures.

CQC is now considering the appropriate regulatory response to resolve the problems we found.