Mill Farm

Updated 29 November 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and one Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a domiciliary service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

Inspection activity started on 29 July 2019 and ended on 7 August 2019. We visited the office location on 31 July 2019.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

During the inspection

We met and spoke with the provider, the registered manager, one coordinator, and two care staff. We also spoke with seven people that used the service and five relatives on the telephone. We reviewed a range of records. This included medicines support records and three people’s care records. We looked at two staff recruitment and support records. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including their plans, policies and procedures.

After the inspection

We continued to seek further clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked reviewed further written feedback from staff. We contacted a professional who regularly worked with the service.

Updated 29 November 2019

About the service

Mill Farm is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living with dementia, physical disabilities, mental health and other conditions. There were 53 people using the service at the time of this inspection. Mill Farm is part of the Home Instead franchise which is a nationwide organisation.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

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

Staff were exceptionally well trained. The provider had an innovative approach to training and worked with specialist agencies to train staff on how the conditions people lived with impacted their life. This supported staff provide the support required to meet people’s needs.

The provider’s protocols and use of technology supported a holistic approach to assessing people’s needs and delivering support.

People were treated with utmost kindness and compassion. They had developed trusting relationships with their care staff and considered them friends and family. The systems within the service promoted the building of positive relationships.

People were supported to be as independent as they wanted to be. People had access to assistive technology which promoted their independence.

The provider delivered support in the wider community which promoted practices where all older people could thrive. They did this through training and providing resources and avenues for social engagement.

People’s history and interest was used to tailor the support they received to them. The service had effective protocols to match staff to people who had similar interest and history. There was a service wide ethos of giving choice and control to people and their relatives.

People were at the core the service. The systems and values within the service demonstrated their commitment to high standards of care for all people. There was a clear structure of leadership and accountability.

The service had a culture of continuous improvement. The provider had systems in place to sustain outstanding care and further improve the service.

There were extensive recruitment protocols in place which enabled the provider employ staff whose values aligned with that of the service. Technology was used to ensure safer management of people’s medicines.

The service had an open culture which promoted reflective practice. Staff understood their role in monitoring the standard of care. Whistleblowing was encouraged within the service and there were systems in place to enable staff feel safe to whistle blow. Staff were confident to raise any concerns and to suggest any improvements.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Outstanding (published 14 December 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.