You are here

Tynwald Residential Home Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 May 2014
Date of Publication: 3 July 2014
Inspection Report published 03 July 2014 PDF | 79.14 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 8 May 2014

During a routine inspection

At the time of our inspection, there were 22 people using the service.

During our inspection we gathered evidence that helped answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection; speaking with people using the service; speaking with the staff supporting people, and to a visiting healthcare professional. We also looked at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We observed that people were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People we spoke with during our inspection told us they felt safe in the home.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. An application that we reviewed had been appropriately submitted. This meant that people were being safeguarded as required.

The service was clean and hygienic. Domestic staff cleaned the home following a regular and deep cleaning schedule. We saw that staff wore aprons and washed their hands before providing care.

Training and supervision of staff was in place and staff were qualified to carry out their roles.

Is the service effective?

People’s individual health and care needs were assessed and care was given that met their needs.

Care records were detailed and contained care plans and risk assessments that were regularly reviewed, along with records of daily care given. People told us that staff made sure their needs were met. Records we looked at included notes from visits by professional clinicians.

We found people were involved in making choices about their care. People told us that they felt well looked after in the home. They were able to choose from a range of activities and could choose to spend time in their own rooms or in the communal areas of the home.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. One person told us, “I am quite happy”. People told us that the staff were friendly and caring. One said, “The staff are very good”.

People’s preferences, interests, and needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People could participate in a range of activities. Regular residents’ meetings were held at which people could share their views with the staff and management of the home.

People and staff told us that they felt comfortable to speak out if they were unhappy.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received care that met their needs. A visiting healthcare professional told us that they had a good rapport with the management and staff at the home.

People we spoke with told us that they felt well cared for in the home.

We found that staff employed in the home were well supported and had training available to them. This ensured that staff were appropriately qualified to undertake their roles.