CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Millbeck
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and infection outbreaks appropriately. Safety was inspected but not rated.
- 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 22 March 2021. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found that the home had suitable supplies of personal protective equipment, hand-washing facilities and cleaning schedules. Staff followed guidance on using protective equipment, and staff and residents were tested in line with national guidance.
The inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a separate rated judgement for safety. It was focused only on infection prevention and control, so it does not assess all aspects of care.
Protective equipment
The home had enough suitable protective equipment, stored hygienically. Staff followed national guidance when putting it on, taking it off and disposing of it.
“The home had sufficient supplies of appropriate PPE which was stored hygienically.” from the report
Training and cleaning
All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff, had training in infection prevention and control. Cleaning schedules and records were in place across the home.
“All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are infection prevention and control arrangements being maintained now?
- 02How do you make sure there is always enough protective equipment, and how is it stored?
- 03How often are cleaning schedules completed and checked, and can families see the records?
- 04How are staff and residents currently tested for infections?
- 05How are face-to-face visits managed now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 April 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, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no serious risks or concerns identified.
This was a comprehensive inspection carried out on 20 and 27 November 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, a relative and staff, and checked care plans, staff records, medicines records and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that staff understood how to protect people, medicines were managed safely, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. There were activities, support for relationships and ways for people to make choices and remain independent.
The home was already rated Good at its previous comprehensive inspection. This inspection found that the evidence still supported that rating and found no serious risks or concerns.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely and records showed they had been given as prescribed and at the right time.
“Medicine administration records (MAR) we viewed had been completed accurately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people's choices, privacy and dignity. Inspectors saw friendly and respectful interactions.
“Interactions between staff and people using the service were friendly but respectful.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, likes and dislikes and gave staff clear guidance about individual support.
“The care plans we looked at were up to date, easy to follow and tailored to meet people's individual needs.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in group or one-to-one activities and were supported to maintain relationships and links with the local community.
“There was a variety of activities within the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure my relative's risk assessments and care plans are reviewed when their needs change?
- 02What activities would be available for my relative, including one-to-one activities if they do not want to join group sessions?
- 03How would you support my relative's independence while keeping them safe?
- 04How are medicines checked and recorded, particularly if my relative's ability to manage them changes?
- 05What progress has been made with the manager's CQC registration since this inspection?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the first day was unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 December 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 Millbeck
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 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
45 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockton-on-Tees
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 £980 to £1,190 a week. 40 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.