Mill Court Care Home

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The staff treated people and their family with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. We observed staff delivered care and support that was caring and person-centred and which had a positive effect on people. People responded well to staff and it showed they enjoyed each other’s company. When people needed support with their personal care, this was done respectfully and by preserving people’s privacy and dignity. People and relatives told us they were happy with the way staff supported them with care and kindness. They said, “[Staff] are very kind and caring, there's always a good bit of banter between them creating a good atmosphere, there's certainly no sign of any discord ever” and “All the [staff] that look after us are very kind and caring.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. People felt they were treated mostly as individuals. Staff were supportive and met people’s individual needs. People and relatives felt they were listened to. They told us communication was good with the service, although not everyone knew about the management structure. People and relatives said, “They are good [staff], but some of the staff have their favourites, no doubt about that” and “Ever so nice they are, there’s this [one staff], often accompanies me [for support], very kind, and careful [this staff] is.” We observed how staff supported people and each other. Most staff demonstrated they knew the needs of the people, they supported them well and understood the importance of treating people as individuals.

The provider and staff did not always promote people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. People were mostly complimentary about staff’s support. But a few people noted some improvements were needed. For example, one person told us they indicated their preferences for staff support but this was not always followed. Although the person told us they were alright with it in the end, however this demonstrated people’s choices were not always respected or actioned. Another person told us they had an issue with managing their medicines. They asked their medicine to be administered at a certain time. But we were informed staff were not always following the person’s wishes. The management team told us they would speak to the staff team to ensure specific people’s wishes were followed consistently.

We observed some activities ongoing where people engaged well and with enthusiasm. But we also observed when people were only sitting in one place and a lack of engagement was visible. One person told us they liked talking to people, but they were visited by staff only at times. They told us that made them feel lonely. Another person told us the activities did not align with their interest. They said, “There is not enough stimulus for people with my ability, so I tend to fill my day with reading…I would really enjoy more mental stimulation.” This meant people could be at risk of social isolation and a lack of regular meaningful engagement to support their wellbeing.

The staff did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. For example, one person became upset over their health condition and wished to speak to the doctor. However, the staff was denying what the person was saying rather than providing reassurance and support at that time. The person eventually calmed down. We raised this with the management team to ensure staff were able to provide reassurance to people’s queries. Another person was found standing outside their room without preserved dignity because they told us the staff were not responding to them. We had to find staff to help them to ensure the person avoided any preventable discomfort, concern or distress. We observed where staff were patient and supportive to the people needing care in the moment. For example, we observed a person was getting upset about staying in the service. We observed staff sat with the person at different times of the day to provide reassurance, which helped the person relax and feel calmer. People and relatives felt the staff responded well if people were unwell. Staff understood how they would respond to people in the most appropriate way to respect their wishes. But they told us the lack of staff was the biggest issue for them to provide quality care and what mattered to people.

The provider and the registered manager did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. The management team told us the provider had different benefits that staff could use as part of their support. There were initiatives such as a wellbeing hub and employee of the month to support staff. However, the provider and the registered manager did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care. The staff told us when they needed support from the registered manager, they often did not take any action. One staff added, “Showers are offered but you do not have time and if you are late you are shouted at. The way [the registered manager] speaks to us is shouting, it makes staff end up having to do the shorter thing.” Staff said they did not always feel supported and valued. The staff team did not always have a sense of belonging and the ability to contribute to decision making. They said, “I feel really unappreciated when I am there [at the service]…[staff] cannot take their break times” and “Some things I had not been trained on, I was told off for not doing. I have now been trained – I was very relieved.” After the site visit, the management team told us the changes they have started making to improve communication, support to the staff, and that the staff felt included and able to contribute to the service. Some staff told us they were able to seek support from the senior staff which they found very helpful and supported their development.