CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Millcroft House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safeguarding systems, staffing checks and medicines processes. The building was clean and infection control arrangements were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments, care plans and recovery goals. Staff received training and supervision, although some required training had not yet been completed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with dignity and respect and were involved in making choices about their care. Staff supported people's individuality, faith, privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was personalised and based on people's recovery needs and preferences. People were supported with activities, relationships, communication and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular audits, checks and action plans. A new manager was making changes and was supported by senior managers.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised rehabilitation support, with some staff training still to be completed.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. Inspectors visited on 15 June 2022 and gathered evidence until 22 June. They spoke with two people living there, a relative and several staff. They also checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home supports up to 10 adult men with mental health needs. There were eight people living there at the inspection. Inspectors found people felt safe, medicines were managed safely, the building was clean and staff used suitable infection control measures.
People received support from staff including occupational therapists and psychologists. Care was based on individual goals and the Recovery Star tool. Inspectors found people were treated with dignity, involved in decisions and supported to build independence.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. This was the home's first inspection, so there was no earlier rating to compare with.
Recovery-focused support
The home used a structured recovery tool and employed specialist staff to help people develop life skills and independence.
“People were supported by a range of staff, including occupational therapists and psychologists, who worked with them to help them on their road to recovery and to regain their independence.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Inspectors found medicines records were completed correctly, medicines were stored properly and staff were checked as competent.
“Medicine training and competency assessments had been completed by staff who administered medicines.” from the report
Choice and respect
People were encouraged to make their own decisions. Their privacy, dignity, cultural needs and faith were respected.
“People were encouraged to make their own choices and decisions, and these were respected.” from the report
Regular oversight
The management team used audits and checks to identify shortfalls and follow up improvements.
“Governance processes, such as audits and checks were completed regularly.” from the report
Some staff training was incomplete
needs fixingInspectors found gaps in the training records showing that some staff had not completed required courses. The manager had started work to address this.
“We noticed some gaps in the training matrix which showed some staff had not completed required courses.” from the report
- 01Which staff training courses were incomplete at the inspection, and have all the gaps now been closed?
- 02How is the new manager's registration with the CQC progressing?
- 03How would you assess and review my relative's recovery goals using the Recovery Star?
- 04How do you decide whether someone can safely manage their own medicines?
- 05How would you involve my relative, their family and health professionals in reviewing their care and progress?
This was the first planned inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five CQC key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 July 2022 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 Millcroft House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 October 2020.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.