Mill House

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.

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

Good: This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff took the time to chat, listen and engage with people in a warm and meaningful way. Interactions were not rushed, and people were treated as individuals whose thoughts and feelings mattered. One person told us, “The staff are quite caring, no problems with them. They always use my name, and they know me.” Care plans included a picture of each person, helping staff to approach care in a more personalised, dignified manner, especially for new or less familiar staff. Staff consistently spoke about people in a respectful way and demonstrated a genuine commitment to keeping them at the centre of their care. One person told us, “I’m treated with a lot of dignity. They come and ask what I want, and I get to choose.” A warm, friendly atmosphere was evident throughout the service. Staff across all levels interacted with each other respectfully and supportively.

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’s individuality was recognised and respected with detailed assessments capturing their personal preferences, routines and support needs. Staff encouraged people to personalise their rooms with familiar belongings and home comforts; however, we found not all rooms had been personalised. It was evident staff took time to get to know the people they cared for. One person told us, “On the whole they know what I need and made me feel at home.” Everyone we spoke with had very positive comments about the service provided. They all said the staff respected their wishes and feelings and treated them with dignity. They said their requests and preferences were listened to and acted upon.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The environment was adapted to promote people’s independence and had recently been refurbished. The service had accessible features for people with reduced mobility which promoted their independence. People told us they felt comfortable discussing their care needs with staff and felt their independence was encouraged. One relative told us, “Except for that one time with the agency person, [staff] treat [relative] in a very dignified way.” Care plans reflected a strong emphasis on choice and control, documenting people’s individual preferences and routines. Staff were aware not to make assumptions, and ensured people’s likes and dislikes were noted and regularly updated. People were supported to maintain meaningful relationships and the service facilitated married couples to share rooms or be in nearby rooms where appropriate.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us they felt well-supported. The regional director told us “A couple of times a week we will press the call bells randomly and at different times to see what the response times are. We listen to feedback from people and relatives. The team told us they felt there weren't enough staff on, so we decided to increase the staffing levels.” Staff told us their workload was manageable, and staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs in a timely way. One staff member told us, “[Service] recently implemented 4 carers on each floor. Took a while to get this put in place. When the hospitality team help out with meals it means we are able to spread out to assist people with meals at lunchtime. That was very helpful.” Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s individual health conditions and how to respond appropriately. They were able to explain how they adapted their communication styles to meet different needs and responded effectively in a range of situations. Care documentation provided very clear guidelines on how to support people with choking and other risks. However, we found one person receiving respite care did not have consistent information about their modified diet in all departments. For example, the care plan differed with information in the kitchen. This presented a risk staff would give the wrong modified diet and put the person at risk. We raised this with the deputy manager and the chef and the inconsistencies were rectified immediately.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they felt well supported and valued opportunities to provide feedback during regular supervisions and team meetings. Staff told us they were supported to work flexibly around personal circumstances. The provider had several schemes to recognise staff including; access to an employee assistance programme, the ability to be more in control of how staff wages were paid, an employee discount scheme and free meals. However, some staff told us they didn’t always feel supported to progress in their roles. One staff member told us, “There’s no support to do my exams for nursing, sometimes I feel the company does not want you to progress.” The regional director told us, “We are very good at developing people to progress. We are still growing and trying to exceed our own expectations. The common goal is to care from the heart. It takes time to embed these values. We want to increase retention; we want to keep the team and grow the team. We want to develop the staff we have. For example, I am working on offering a preceptorship programme. We want to increase the recruitment, so we won't need to rely on agency.” The regional director told us they were not aware anyone had expressed an interest in completing their nursing exams but would look into this.