Mill Lane

Updated 6 June 2019

The inspection: We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team: The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an assistant inspector.

Service and service type: Mill Lane is a ‘Care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Mill Lane is not registered to provide nursing care. Mill Lane accommodates five people in one adapted building.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: We gave the service two days’ notice of the inspection site visit because it is small, and the manager is often out supporting staff. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

What we did: Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service to aid with our inspection planning. This included notifications. Notifications are incidents that the registered manager must notify us of. The provider also completed and sent CQC a Provider Information Return (PIR) in March 2019. Providers are required to send us key information about their service, what they do well and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspection. We also contacted other health and social care organisations such as representatives from local authority contracting teams and safeguarding team. We also contacted Healthwatch (an independent organisation for people who use health and social care services). This was to ask their views about the service provided.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who used the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, a senior support staff and two support staff. We looked at two people’s care records and corresponding risk assessments, and monitoring records. We also looked at records used in the management of the service.

Updated 6 June 2019

About the service: Mill Lane is a residential care home that was providing personal care to five people at the time of the inspection.

The service was set up prior to the Registering the Right Support guidance. However, the service worked in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and, or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice and independence. People using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that was appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service: The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways. By staff’s promotion of people’s choice and control, independence and inclusion. People’s support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and becoming more independent.

People at Mill Lane received outstanding care and support by a registered manager and staff team that were committed, passionate and knowledgeable. Staff were creative in helping people to express their views and people were consulted about all aspects of their care and support. People were provided with pictorial guidance and other communication tools to involve them in decisions. These various methods helped staff, alongside the person where possible, identify the persons aspirations and goals and plan the review of each person’s care.

Staff were flexible and responsive to people’s individual needs and preferences. Often finding creative and innovative ways to help people live a full and meaningful a life as possible. Staff were interested in and found out about people’s interests and supported them to maintain these. They knew people well and were skilled at engaging them in activities they enjoyed, including trips out. People lived busy social lives and took part in a wide range of interests, including teaching sign language and paid work that helped promote their confidence and well-being. Engagement in activities and support networks outside of the service was an important part of people’s lives. Staff enabled people to take a key role in the local community and were always looking to build further links.

There was a strong recognition from staff that people were individuals. Staff spoke enthusiastically about providing people with high quality, person-centred care. Staff were skilled at recognising when people were feeling vulnerable, needed reassurance and how this was to be given.

People’s wishes, ideas, suggestions and concerns were listened to, respected, and acted upon. Staff took time and strove to overcome any obstacles to help people achieve their aspirations and how people wanted to spend their time. This made people feel empowered and valued.

Staff knew how to protect people from risk and harm and how to report concerns. Information was provided in different formats, to help enable people to understand how to report any incidents of harm. Staff identified any accidents and incidents that happened and quick action was taken. Learning was shared with other staff, to reduce the risk of it happening again.

Risk management plans provided detailed information for staff on how to reduce and monitor the risks to people’s health and welfare. Equipment and technology was used to increase people’s independence and support people’s well-being. People were having their medicines as prescribed. Staff were working with external health professionals and current guidance to promote people’s well-being.

An advocacy service was available to people to make sure their needs and wishes were communicated and listened to. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People received a kind and compassionate service from staff who knew their care and support needs very well. Staff maintained and promoted people’s privacy and dignity and respected their equality and diversity.

People were involved in the recruitment of potential new staff. Staff were trained to meet people’s care and support needs and development opportunities were in place for staff to increase their skills and knowledge. Supervisions and competency checks were in place to monitor and develop staff.

The provider and registered manager were experienced, skilled leaders who were committed to involving people, relatives, staff in the development of the service. People, their relatives, representatives, and staff were involved and enabled to make suggestions to improve how the service was run. Audit and governance systems were in place to monitor the service, to drive forward any sustained improvements required. The registered manager and their staff team linked up, communicated and worked with other organisations to ensure people’s well-being.

Rating at last inspection: This is the first inspection of this service since it underwent a registration change on 4 May 2018.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection as part of CQC’s routine inspection programme.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk