Miller House Care Home

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Before people moved into the service a comprehensive assessment of their needs, preferences, and choices was completed. This ensured the service was suitable for them. Assessments were used to develop individualised care and support plans which were regularly reviewed. One relative told us, “When [person] came to live here at first, we sat down in the office to develop the care plan. We also planned mental health assessments and told staff about their likes and dislikes.”

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.

Staff used recognised assessment tools to help assess and evaluate people’s care needs. These included the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST) to identify people at risk of malnutrition and dehydration. Staff applied their training and knowledge and followed the guidance within these tools to determine when people needed additional support from external professionals, for example a dietician.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff were kept up to date about people’s care and support needs through handover meetings held at the start of each shift. Information such as care plans and risk assessments was stored and shared through the electronic care management system which staff accessed via handheld devices.

Systems were in place to ensure information about people was shared appropriately with other external health and social care organisations when needed.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were referred to medical and nursing professionals when advice was needed. This ensured people’s ongoing health needs were monitored and addressed promptly. Staff had completed on-line training in a number of health conditions, including epilepsy, diabetes and sepsis awareness. This provided them with a basic understanding of these conditions and how to care for people with them appropriately.

People were supported to eat a balanced diet. Relatives were happy with the quality of the meals. One relative commented, “The food seems to be good here. [Person] is eating well and enjoys mealtimes.” People’s weight was regularly monitored to help identify any unplanned weight loss. When people had lost weight, they had been referred to a dietician or their GP for advice and ongoing nutritional support.

We observed the lunchtime meal. There was a pleasant atmosphere throughout the meal, with good interaction between carers and people who were dining. There were no menu cards or pictorial aids, but staff were observed to show the menu choices by offering plated up meals to help people choose their meal.

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.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s individual needs and how to promote their health and wellbeing in their day-to-day care. Relatives spoke positively about how health concerns were managed. One relative told us, “There are good links here with the GP. The mental health team has visited to assess [person] here as well.”

The registered manager had regular oversight of people’s health through health-related audits and checks, for example monitoring people’s weight and monitoring accidents and incidents.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and demonstrated an understanding of its principles. They told us they ensured consent was sought before care and support were provided. A relative commented, “It seems to be consensual care - nothing is ever forced on the residents, and staff ask before delivering any care.”

There was evidence of best interest decisions being made appropriately when people lacked capacity to agree to specific support or treatment. For example, where medicines had to be given covertly.