Mill Hayes

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We assessed a limited number of quality statements in the caring key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect. People were supported by kind and compassionate staff, who treated them with dignity and respect. However, at times staff used infantilised language to describe people’s responses to various activities. People told us how staff encouraged them to be independent. We observed staff encouraging people to engage in a wide range of activities in the home and in the community. Staff respected people’s privacy and asked for people’s permission before supporting them.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People told us they received care from kind staff. Relatives told us staff were friendly and approachable.

Staff told us they treated people as individuals. One staff member told us how they had supported one person to develop their writing skills.

We observed staff treating people as individuals and listening to them. However, we raised concerns over the use of some infantilised language used by staff when referring to people’s responses to activities. Whilst there was no malice intended, people should be recognised as adults and referred to with respect. The provider responded by discussing our findings with the staff team and sharing their internal campaign called ‘mind your language’.

Care plans were person-centred. However, care plans were not always in date with people’s changing needs and daily records were not always completed in sufficient detail to reflect how staff were meeting people's aspirations, culture and background.

People told us they were encouraged to be independent. One person told us about a recent trip they had taken independently. Another person told us about a new relationship they had developed with a person from the community.

Staff told us they promoted people’s independence. One staff member said, “I like helping people feel important. I help people to gain new skills.”

We observed staff encouraging people to be independent and complete daily living tasks, such as cleaning and laundry.

People were observed being supported appropriately and various activities being offered. However, daily records did not always document actions taken by staff to promote independence or offer activities.

People told us they liked and trusted the staff who supported them. We observed staff responded quickly to people when needed. Staff sat and talked to people about their choices. Relatives told us the provider kept them up to date with any changes in people’s health.

Staff told us how they supported people when required. One staff member told us how they supported people when they experienced distressed behaviour and another staff member told us they often sat in with health professional visits to support people when requested.

We observed staff responding quickly to people’s needs. One person was experiencing distressed behaviour due to the late arrival of a visiting professional. Staff showed compassion and understanding when supporting the person.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.