CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Millpool
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- The person lived in a safe, clean environment and individual risks were identified and reviewed. Inspectors recommended regular updates to safeguarding training and noted that an up-to-date DBS check was needed for someone in regular contact with the person.
- Effective?
- Good
- The person had regular health checks, a balanced diet and support from health and social care professionals. Inspectors found that consent and best-interest decisions were not fully recorded, and some training needed to be refreshed.
- Caring?
- Good
- The person was treated with compassion, dignity and respect. They were supported to make choices, maintain independence and take part in everyday activities.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and records described the person's needs and preferences. Family contact and activities were supported, but a continuity plan for care had not initially been in place.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider was open, responsive to feedback and worked with relatives and professionals. Governance was suitable for the family-home setting, although formal systems for consent and best-interest decisions had previously been lacking.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Harleston was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some important decisions and training needed better records and updating.
Inspectors visited on 13 February 2023. They met the provider, their partner and the person living at the home. They looked around the home, checked care records and spoke with three relatives after the visit.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found a clean and safe environment, personalised care, regular health checks, safe medicines support and help to stay involved with family, friends and the local community.
There were some gaps in records and procedures. Best-interest decisions had not been formally recorded, written consent was not on file, some training needed updating and a plan for continuity of care had not initially been put in place. The provider gave assurances that several issues had been addressed after the inspection.
Safe, clean home
Inspectors found the home comfortable, clean and safe, with furniture and equipment in good condition.
“The family home was spotless with high standards of cleanliness evident.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was based on the person's needs, communication, routines and preferences. Risk assessments were clear and kept under review.
“The care plan, and risk assessment, was person-centred and based on the person's needs and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
The person was supported in a stable family setting that promoted dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
“The culture within the home was positive and we were confident that the persons dignity, privacy and independence were fully promoted.” from the report
Community and family links
The person regularly took part in social activities, accessed the local community and kept in contact with family and friends.
“They regularly accessed social activities and were involved in their local community.” from the report
Best-interest decisions were not recorded
needs fixingDecisions made for the person had been discussed with professionals but were not formally recorded or discussed with family members. Inspectors recommended clearer recording of consent and best-interest decisions.
“Decisions taken in their best interest had been discussed with relevant professionals but not recorded to show what decision had been reached and how this was in the persons best interest.” from the report
Written consent was missing
needs fixingWritten consent for the person's care and support was not on file. The provider was asked to address this.
“Written consent for the persons care and support was not on file.” from the report
Training and DBS checks needed updating
needs fixingSome essential training had not been updated for several years. An up-to-date DBS check was also needed for someone in regular contact with the person.
“We recommend the registered provider completes regular updates for essential training such as safeguarding training which they confirmed they had not completed for a number of years.” from the report
- 01How are consent and best-interest decisions now recorded, and how are relatives involved?
- 02Has safeguarding and other essential training been brought up to date?
- 03Has the DBS check for anyone in regular contact with the person been completed?
- 04How are medicines reviews recorded and evidenced by health professionals?
- 05What is the current plan if the usual provider cannot provide care, even temporarily?
This was the first inspection of a newly registered location and covered all five key questions; the service had previously been rated Good before its registration, name and address changed. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 March 2023 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 Millpool
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 April 2022.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.