Maison Moti Care Home

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

People told us they had reviews of their care. They were able to discuss how things were going for them and talk about what they wanted their care and support to look like. Staff worked together with people’s care teams, so people were able to maintain their health and well-being. Staff understood how the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) impacted in the care they provided to people. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

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.

People told us they had reviews of their care. They were able to discuss how things were going for them and talk about what they wanted their care and support to look like. Staff worked together with people’s care teams, so people were able to maintain their health and wellbeing. Staff understood how the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) impacted in the care they provided to people.

The registered manger was able to explain how important it was for people to have regular reviews of their care. They understood people should receive support tailored to the individuals specific care and support needs.

The provider had a referral coordinator based at their head office where initial referrals were submitted. The referral was then passed onto the registered manager to assess the referral and carry out any pre-admission assessments. Assessments looked at people’s care and support needs and aimed to build a rapport with the person. People were given an opportunity to visit the service and have overnight stays to ensure they felt this was the right placement for them. Following the initial assessment, a care plan was created in collaboration with the person. People received regular reviews of their care once living at the home and care plans were updated following these assessments or immediately if a person’s needs changed.

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.

The majority of people living at the home had been there for a number of years. They told us they were happy with how the staff and their care teams worked together to ensure their wellbeing.

The registered manager understood the importance of information sharing between appropriate care teams to facilitate good care experiences for people. They told us people were fully involved in the initial assessment process and on-going care reviews.

The local authority told us the home worked well with them and were open when they asked for information.

When people were initially accepted to the home, the registered manager, where appropriate, put in place a transition plan to ensure the person’s experience of moving between services was positive.

People were encouraged to maintain their health and wellbeing. People told us staff helped book and attended appointments with them if they needed support.

The registered manager understood the importance of ensuring people had access to routine healthcare.

There were processes in place to monitor when people needed to attend routine healthcare, such as opticians and dentists. Where any changes in people’s care and support needs were identified, care plans and risk assessments were updated if necessary.

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.

Where people could make decisions about the care they received, staff encouraged and supported people to be independent and offered choice in the care they provided. People told us staff always asked them if they were ready to receive help.

Staff that we spoke with and the registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of the MCA and how this impacted on people that they worked with. Staff were able to explain how they asked for people’s consent before delivering any care and support.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty had the appropriate legal authority and were being met. Staff had received training on the MCA which was refreshed yearly. Where people were subject to a DoLS this was clearly documented in their care plans and records showed when DoLS needed to be reviewed.