Mill House

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating for this key question has remained good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People had an assessment of need prior to moving to the service and the manager worked closely with other agencies and services, reporting they had a good rapport with the local authority and mental health trust. Families spoken with told us they were happy with communication and the support given to them and their relatives. One relative told us, “Oh, with the transition, they were fantastic. We looked at another place, but it wasn't suitable. They came to the hospital to chat with them, and they were young so they could relate to them. They were so kind and caring. They put me at ease, and they put [family member] at ease too. It ended up that the transition was quite easy, and they had a beautiful room. Before that, hospital rooms – no comparison.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People’s care plans looked at outcomes people wished to achieve, and these were reviewed with people and adjusted in line with their wishes and needs. Initial care assessments were kept under review and the local authority carried out their reviews. People were supported to access the GP and have their medicines and health needs reviewed and people’s mental health was reviewed. This helped ensure people’s needs were clearly documented and there was a clear plan in place to identify and address any changing need.

The provider worked effectively across teams and services to ensure people experienced well- coordinated and consistent support. Information about individuals' needs was shared appropriately when people moved between services, meaning they did not have to repeat their story.

The manager and deputy manager were very experienced and had built up good networks of support and relationships with the local community. In regard to some recent negative communication from a health care professional, the manager had referred this to the local authority and had investigated the concerns when asked. The manager was open and transparent in her communication.

People’s assessments were shared as required with people’s involvement and consent.

Staff worked across multiple agencies to ensure there were clear lines of communication and review so peoples’ support could be adapted to enhance their well-being and emotional security and to prevent mental health relapses. Multidisciplinary review included people, the relevant professional and representative.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing in ways that maximised their independence, choice and control. Staff promoted healthy lifestyles and where possible reduced their future needs for care and support.

People were supported with most aspects of their daily lives and routines, and they were supported to access the services they needed. For example, one person was looking to access weight watchers and people were supported to exercise. People’s weights were routinely monitored, and we asked if this was necessary for everyone. People were supported to access health services when needed and staff prompted people to eat and drink in line with their needs.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

A key worker system helped ensure people could develop close working relationships with someone they trusted and could advocate for them. Regular reviews of care plans, goals and objectives showed how people’s care and support was central to their needs.

As part of a person’s recovery, reduction in addictions had helped them achieve improved health and well-being. One person had an interest in animals and had a number of pets. Caring for their animals gave them a routine and structure which staff said has supported them to regulate their emotions and give them a renewed sense of purpose.

Lifestyles could be compromised by people’s personal choices such as diet and smoking, but staff supported people in their choices. Equally there was strong evidence that risks associated with alcohol assumption were reduced and some people experienced improved outcomes from stopping alcohol and developing a more positive lifestyle. This improved people’s well-being and reduced the negative of chronic illnesses such as diabetes.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We saw evidence that initial assessments were carried out before the commencement of service delivery.

Staff spoken with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005codes of practice and its practical application. Person-centred care was delivered which underpinned people’s human rights and the Equality Act 2010. We observed staff supporting people and offering choices in the least restrictive way.

The manager recognised that people needed a supportive environment but only 2 people were subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which gave them a legal framework to enhance their safety lawfully. People were not subject to unnecessary restriction and valid consent was sought and documented for key areas of people’s lives.