CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mill House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, admissions, PPE, testing, hygiene and infection outbreaks appropriately. The home had an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for family contact during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 January 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found the home was very clean. Cleaning schedules, handwashing facilities and PPE were in place. People and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing, and people's temperatures were checked daily.
The home supported people to keep in touch with their families by telephone and electronic devices. People also had drives and exercised in local safe spaces.
The home was inspected but not rated. The inspection did not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas.
Clean premises
The home was very clean, with cleaning schedules that included frequently touched points.
“The premises were very clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place including for touch points.” from the report
Testing and temperature checks
People living in the home and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing. People's temperatures were checked every day.
“People using the service and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing and people's temperatures were taken daily.” from the report
Family contact
The home helped people stay in contact with their families using telephone calls and electronic devices.
“People were supported to stay in touch with their families through telephone calls and electronic devices.” from the report
Community access
People continued to have drives and exercise in local safe spaces.
“People accessed the community for drives and for exercise in local safe spaces.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are people living here and staff tested for COVID-19 now?
- 02What arrangements are currently in place for family visits and other contact?
- 03How do you make sure staff use PPE correctly, and what training do they receive?
- 04How are people supported to access the community and exercise safely now?
- 05How do you manage a suspected infection or outbreak in the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 February 2021 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.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
The inspection took place on 5 September 2018. One inspector reviewed records, observed care and staff interactions, looked around the home, and spoke with people, staff and the manager. Information from the local authority, previous inspections and safeguarding notifications was also considered.
The home supports up to four people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found systems to manage risks, medicines, staffing and safeguarding. They also found that staff received suitable training and followed people's care plans and the Mental Capacity Act.
People appeared relaxed and happy. Staff knew people's communication methods, preferences and routines, and supported them to take part in activities and community visits. The home had clear leadership, regular audits and processes for listening to people, relatives and staff.
The overall rating was Good, and Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. The previous inspection had also rated the home Good, so the rating remained unchanged.
Personalised communication
Staff understood subtle cues from people who could not always communicate verbally. Care plans and communication tools explained how people expressed their needs and choices.
“They were able to recognise subtle cues from people that enabled staff to respond appropriately to their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people warmly and sensitively. People appeared relaxed and confident, and staff took steps to protect privacy and dignity.
“The atmosphere throughout our observation was one of familiarity, friendship, support and calmness.” from the report
Choice and active lives
People helped choose their activities and meals, and were supported to use local facilities and attend community events. Staff used pictures and easy-read information to support choice.
“People led full and active lives. They engaged in a wide range of activities based on their personal choices.” from the report
Safety systems
Risks, incidents, medicines and staffing were monitored. Inspectors found that incidents were reviewed so the team could identify patterns and improve support.
“All incidents and accidents were reviewed regularly.” from the report
Listening and improvement
The service sought the views of people, relatives and staff. Managers used regular audits and action plans to monitor quality and share learning.
“Quality audits and governance processes were in place to enable continuous improvement in the quality of the service provided and to ensure that learning was shared.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you learn and respond to my relative's particular communication cues, especially if they cannot communicate verbally?
- 02What support would my relative receive if they became distressed or showed behaviour that might place themselves or others at risk?
- 03How would you involve our family in care reviews and decisions made in our relative's best interests?
- 04What activities and community visits could be planned around my relative's own interests and choices?
- 05Which areas of the home are due for refurbishment, and when will this work be completed?
This was a planned inspection of the overall service covering Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 September 2018 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 House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.