You are here

Mill Hayes Residential Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 1 October 2019

About the service

Mill Hayes is a residential care home providing personal care to five people under 65 at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to seven people with diagnosed learning disabilities, autistic spectrum disorder and mental health needs. The building has been configured to meet the needs of people with complex behaviour. People at the home have their own bedroom with additional lounge space. As well as access to a shared lounge, conservatory and large kitchen. People have access to outside space and the building is close to local amenities.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the 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 the 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 receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.

As part of the thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.

The service used some restrictive intervention practices as a last resort, in a person-centred way, in line with positive behaviour support principles.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting 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 become more independent.

Risks to people’s safety were assessed and no areas of concern were identified within the environment. People were protected from the risk of infection and the building was being repaired when damaged.

People were protected from harm by staff who understood and felt confident to speak up. People were supported by enough staff and who when recruited were subject to a probationary period.

People’s medicine was stored securely and administered by trained staff. Medicine errors were investigated and action taken where necessary

Lessons were learnt when things went wrong, and information shared as required. The service tried to continually improve and work in partnership with others.

People were supported to achieve positive outcomes and have new experiences. People accessed the community and were supported to build new relationships.

Staff were clear about their role and responsibilities and worked well as a team. People were engaged with and helped to develop a service that was less restrictive.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 20 June2019) and there were two breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted in part by a notification o

Inspection areas



Updated 1 October 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 20 June 2019

The service was not always effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 20 June 2019

The service was not always caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.



Updated 20 June 2019

The service was responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.



Updated 1 October 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.