CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitor arrangements, protective equipment, testing, cleaning, and managing possible outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection, although inspectors noted that staff supported residents' social and emotional wellbeing.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and Covid-19 safety arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 12 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors were managed to reduce infection risks. Staff used face masks and had enough protective equipment. Staff and residents received weekly Covid-19 testing, and there were processes for symptoms.
The home was clean and tidy, with daily cleaning. Staff supported residents' social and emotional wellbeing, and all staff had training in infection prevention and control and protective equipment.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Infection control systems
The home had systems to reduce the risk of visitors bringing in or spreading Covid-19. Its infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
“The provider had systems and processes in place in line with guidance to ensure visitors to the home did not introduce and spread Covid-19.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Staff wore face masks and the home had enough protective equipment. Staff and residents received weekly Covid-19 testing.
“All staff were wearing face masks. The home had sufficient supplies of PPE.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the premises clean and tidy, with cleaning carried out every day.
“The premises were clean and tidy. There was a daily routine of cleaning.” from the report
Staff training and wellbeing support
Staff had training in infection prevention and control and protective equipment. Staff also supported residents' social and emotional wellbeing.
“All staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control (IPC) and PPE.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked and managed to reduce infection risks?
- 02How often are staff and residents currently tested for Covid-19 or other infections?
- 03How do you make sure there is enough protective equipment for staff and residents?
- 04What happens if a resident or staff member develops symptoms of an infection?
- 05What were the home's ratings or findings for medicines, care planning, staffing, and leadership at its most recent wider inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; 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
Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield is rated Good overall, but well-led was rated Requires Improvement because some quality checks were not followed through.
Inspectors visited on 22 August 2018. The visit was announced because this is a very small home. One inspector looked around the home, spoke with people and staff, and checked care records, recruitment files, medicines, and safety and quality records.
People were described as safe, well cared for and supported by staff who knew them well. Inspectors found good medicines systems overall, personalised care plans, respectful care, support for independence and activities chosen by the people living there.
The overall rating remained Good, as did Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement and had deteriorated from Good because some audit actions were not followed through, leading to missed checks on staff supervision and appraisals.
Kind and respectful support
Staff protected people's privacy and supported them in a calm and caring way. Inspectors saw positive relationships, interaction and encouragement of independence.
“We saw lots of interaction between the staff and people who used the service, with lots of fun and laughter.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences, histories and social choices. They were reviewed monthly and updated when needs changed.
“Care plans included detailed information about people's lifestyle choices.” from the report
Support for independence
People were supported to make choices about meals, activities, outings and holidays, while receiving help when they needed it.
“People were supported to make their own lunches, some chose to eat meals in the community.” from the report
Staff skills and medicines
Staff received training and medicines competency checks. Inspectors found no gaps in the medicine administration records they reviewed.
“Staff who administered medication had been trained to do so and we saw their competency had been checked.” from the report
Unsigned medicine instructions
needs fixingSome protocols for medicines given when needed had not been signed by two staff members. Managers said this would be addressed straight away.
“However, we saw these forms had not always been signed by two members of staff.” from the report
Incomplete health record
minorOne care plan did not record a GP follow-up that managers said had taken place. Inspectors highlighted the need for records to be kept up to date.
“In one person's care plan a GP follow up had not been recorded” from the report
Quality checks not followed through
needs fixingActions from a quality audit were not completed. This meant some checks on staff supervision and appraisals were missed and contributed to the Requires Improvement rating for well-led.
“As a result of this some of the quality assurance around supervisions and appraisals had been missed.” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure all as-required medicine protocols are signed by two staff members?
- 02How do you now check that audits are completed and their actions are followed through?
- 03How are staff supervision and appraisals being monitored so none are missed?
- 04How do you make sure health-care appointments and follow-ups are recorded promptly in care plans?
- 05What changes have been made since the well-led rating fell from Good to Requires Improvement?
This was an announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, based on observations, conversations and checks of care, staff and safety records. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 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 Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield →
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Millennium Care Services - 32 Sunnyfield →
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Wakefield
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 £1,260 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
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.