Mountfitchet House

People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed staff taking time to listen and respond kindly.

“We observed staff speaking to people in a kind and caring way, taking their time, and listening to what people wanted.” from the report

Staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines. Records and stock checks were accurate.

“People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff had received medicines training and the provider had assessed their competency to ensure they understood how to support people safely.” from the report

Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, and staff responded promptly when people asked for help.

“There were enough staff available to support people's needs.” from the report

The management team was visible and approachable. The home used audits, feedback and partnerships with other professionals to improve care.

“The provider had systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of people's care.” from the report

People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care. Care plans recorded preferences and daily routines.

“People and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing their care.” from the report

Inspectors saw staff supporting people to stand in a way that could cause injury. The provider arranged immediate discussion, observation and retraining.

“This type of support is not safe for the person and places them at risk of sustaining an injury.” from the report

One person's documented continence preferences were not followed during the inspection. Inspectors said this affected the person's dignity and independence.

“People's care was not always delivered in line with their care plans and did not always follow best practice.” from the report

For some staff new to care, records did not clearly show how they had gained the required knowledge and skills. The provider said it would review the induction documents.

“It was not always clear whether they had been supported to complete the Care Certificate.” from the report

Some risk assessments were not updated when people's mobility needs changed. This could leave staff with conflicting instructions, although staff knew people's current needs during the inspection.

“This meant staff may have contradictory guidance about how to support people safely.” from the report

Feedback about meals, snacks and activities was mixed. Some records of snacks and drinks were incomplete, and the minibus was not working, limiting trips out.

“The provider told us they were aware of people's concerns and had already responded to people's feedback by asking for suggestions and trialling new, more tailored activities throughout the week.” from the report