CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mill Green
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Risk assessments and plans for people with epilepsy, autism and other specific health conditions were not always detailed enough. Seizure records were inconsistent, and staff needed more training in some emergency seizure medicines.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received effective support, had access to health professionals and were supported with food, drink and mobility. Extra epilepsy and autism training was arranged after the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people warmly and respectfully. People were involved in choices about their care, daily routines and how they spent their time.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The home offered personalised activities, accessible communication and support to maintain relationships and use local community facilities. However, some care records did not describe individual health support in enough detail.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were described as approachable and the home had clear person-centred values. Audits, feedback and learning systems were in place, although some incident recording was not consistent.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but Safe was Requires Improvement because epilepsy risks and records were not always managed well.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 June 2019. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicines records, incident records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. People were treated with kindness and respect, involved in decisions, supported to stay active and helped to maintain links with family and the local community.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that risk plans for conditions such as epilepsy and autism were not detailed enough. Seizures were not always recorded consistently, and staff had not yet had all the training needed to give some emergency seizure medicines.
The provider took action after the inspection. This included reviewing risk plans, arranging extra training and increasing night staffing. CQC said it would continue to monitor information about the home and could inspect sooner if concerns were received.
Choice and involvement
People and relatives were involved in care decisions. Staff supported people to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People were involved in decisions about their care.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to exercise, use the gardens, join clubs, go on trips and take part in local events.
“The registered manager increased the home's ties to local community groups to enhance people's everyday lives.” from the report
Food and personal preferences
People were offered choices and alternatives at mealtimes. Staff met different dietary needs and monitored nutrition where needed.
“People's dietary preferences were met and respected by staff.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff could raise concerns and make suggestions. Managers were described as available and approachable.
“People, relatives and staff told us managers had an 'open door' and were always available and 'very approachable'.” from the report
Epilepsy risk planning
seriousRisk assessments and risk management plans did not always give staff enough information to support people safely with epilepsy and autism.
“risk assessments and risk mitigation plans needed to be improved to support people with specific health conditions such as epilepsy and autism” from the report
Seizure recording
seriousSome epileptic seizures were not recorded consistently. This limited the home's ability to identify patterns and learn how to prevent or manage future incidents.
“the recording of some incidents, such as when people had epileptic seizures was not consistent.” from the report
Staff training and care records
needs fixingStaff had not been trained to administer some medicines used to control seizures, and some care records did not set out individual health support in enough detail. The provider arranged extra training and said it was reviewing the records.
“staff had not been trained in how to administer some medicines that could control and reduce epileptic seizures” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to epilepsy risk assessments and care plans since the inspection?
- 02Which staff are trained to give emergency seizure medicines, and how often is their competency checked?
- 03How are seizures and other incidents recorded and reviewed now?
- 04What night-time checks are carried out for people at risk of seizures?
- 05How do you make sure each person's care record gives staff enough detail about their individual health needs?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection that looked at all five CQC questions and assessed both the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Mill Green
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Warwickshire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.