Mount Park

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

The person’s relative told us they felt their family member was safe living at Mount Park. Staff knew how to recognise and report concerns to ensure people’s safety. Staff had implemented procedures to review any safety concerns and ensured these were learnt from. Staff supported the person to ensure their safety when using the internet and accessing online content.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that the service complied with the MCA and DoLS authorisations were in place to ensure the person’s safety.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Staff assessed risks to the person’s safety and implemented risk management plans. This ensured the person’s safety at the service and in the community. Staff were aware of how to respond to ensure their safety and the person’s safety should the person exhibit heightened behaviour that challenged staff. Staff worked in line with the person’s positive behaviour support plan.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

Safe recruitment practices were in place to ensure suitable staff were employed. Staff went through a comprehensive induction to ensure they were aware of their role and to ensure they were a ‘good fit’ at the service. This included ensuring the person using the service was happy with the new staff member. New staff underwent a shadowing period to familiarise themselves with the service and the person’s support needs.

Safe staffing levels were in place to ensure the person was supported safely and promptly able to get their needs met. Rotas confirmed the service was staffed in line with the person’s dependency level. The registered manager provided cover when necessary, including during short-notice absences. This flexible and responsive staffing approach ensured continuity of care and maintained safety standards.

Staff received regular training to continue to update their knowledge and skills. This was a mix of online and face to face training, and included mandatory training on supporting people with learning disabilities and autistic people. Staff felt well supported in their role and had regular formal and informal supervision sessions and development reviews. A staff member said, “I feel safe working here and as a team we support each other and work together.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.