CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Millview Short Stay Respite
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection. These included safe admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning, ventilation and an up-to-date infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; Millview Short Stay Respite had strong infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. The report records the inspection visit as 27 April 2021 on the front page and 28 April 2021 in the detailed findings.
Inspectors found safe arrangements for people arriving for respite. These included welfare checks before arrival, temperature checks, individual risk assessments, PPE for staff and visitors, regular cleaning, ventilation and access to outdoor space.
The overall service was inspected but not rated. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated. This means the visit looked at infection control arrangements rather than giving a full quality rating across the service.
Safe arrivals
People had checks before arriving, including welfare assessments, temperature checks and individual risk assessments.
“A welfare assessment was carried out prior to arrival for their stay.” from the report
Use of PPE
Staff and visitors were required to use PPE. Staff had separate changing arrangements and had extra infection control training.
“Staff had received additional training in infection prevention and control and the use of PPE.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home extremely clean, with daily and weekly cleaning schedules. Rooms were ventilated and people could use outdoor space.
“The home was extremely clean. Comprehensive cleaning schedules were in place and carried out daily and weekly.” from the report
Infection control support
The manager had support and guidance from the local authority and public health teams. The home also had detailed COVID-19 policies and risk assessments.
“The registered manager was supported to ensure effective infection prevention and control practice and manage risks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are welfare assessments completed before a person arrives for respite?
- 02What infection prevention and PPE training do staff currently receive?
- 03Are the daily and weekly cleaning schedules still being completed and checked?
- 04How do you arrange testing for people using the home and for staff?
- 05What is the current procedure if an infection outbreak occurs?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a full overall rating or ratings for the other questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 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, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 December 2019. Two inspectors visited on the first day, and one contacted families and carers on the second day. They spoke with one person, six relatives and five staff, and checked care, medicine and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found clean premises, safe medicines practice, detailed care plans and risk assessments, kind staff, and good support for people's choices, communication, routines and activities.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement, with breaches of four health and social care regulations and two registration regulations. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and that the home was no longer in breach.
Personalised care
Care records were detailed and focused on each person's choices, communication needs and preferences. Families were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“People's care records were very person centred, detailed and specific to the individual and their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff engaging warmly with people. Relatives said staff listened, respected their relatives and supported them to be independent.
“During our observations we saw people's needs and wishes were met by attentive and engaging staff.” from the report
Improved safety
The home had improved its infection control, risk assessments, medicine systems and safety checks since the last inspection.
“The service had made significant improvements since the last inspection.” from the report
Communication and activities
Communication plans explained how to support each person, including the use of pictures, symbols and Makaton. The home also helped people continue their usual activities and interests.
“Communication plans included how to read facial expressions and body language.” from the report
Staff training
Staff had mandatory training, extra training for people's specific needs and regular checks of their skills.
“Staff now received a programme of training and supervision to enable them to provide safe and effective care.” from the report
Feedback surveys
minorThe home carried out satisfaction surveys but said it planned to improve the questions so they would be more useful in shaping the service.
“They told us they had plans to improve the questions asked to make the surveys more meaningful in shaping the service.” from the report
- 01Have the three window restrictors now been fitted, and how are window safety checks recorded?
- 02How do you make sure the improvements found at this inspection have been maintained since December 2019?
- 03How will families' feedback from satisfaction surveys be used to change the service?
- 04Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and what arrangements are in place while the registered manager is absent?
- 05What would happen if someone using short-term respite needed end of life care, given that the end of life policy was being updated?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection based on the previous rating and covered all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; inspectors did not receive a provider information return before the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 January 2020 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 Millview Short Stay Respite
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Stockport
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. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.