You are here

Archived: Tranquility House Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 17 July 2014
Date of Publication: 30 August 2014
Inspection Report published 30 August 2014 PDF

Overview

Inspection carried out on 17 July 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection team was made up of one adult social care inspector. We read the care records of three people that used the service. We spoke with five members of staff and spoke with three people that used the service. We also spoke with a relative of a person using the service.

Tranquility House provides personal care and accommodation for up to 20 older people. There were 17 people using the service at the time of our inspection.

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we ask:

� Is the service safe?

� Is the service effective?

� Is the service caring?

� Is the service responsive?

� Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People were not safe because staff recruitment records did not contain all the information required by the Health and Social Care Act 2008. This meant that some of the background checks required to be made before staff were employed to work for the service had not been completed. People were at risk of receiving care from staff who may not be suitable to work with vulnerable adults. A compliance action has been set for this and the provider must tell us how they plan to improve.

People who were using the service benefited from safe care and support, due to good decision making and appropriate management of risks to their health, welfare and safety. Equipment at the home had been maintained and serviced regularly. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. No applications had been submitted. The manager understood when an application should be made and how to do so.

Is the service effective?

People received effective care and support. People told us that they were happy with the care they received and felt their needs had been met. People had benefited from equipment that was comfortable and safe. We saw that staff understood people's care and support needs and that they knew the people well. One person told us, "They�re really very good; all the staff are friendly and kind. I enjoy a good joke with them�. This was added to by a visitor who said, �...staff understand. They are very kind and patient�.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by staff who were attentive and courteous. We saw that staff were patient and encouraging when they provided people with support. People told us that the staff cared about them. People's privacy, dignity and independence had been promoted.

Is the service responsive?

People�s needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. People told us they had been given the right support and had been helped in areas that were important to them. Records illustrated that people�s preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided that met their wishes.

Is the service well led?

The service was well led because it had a registered manager and people and their relatives told us they felt listened to. The manager carried out regular audits including areas such as, care plans, risk assessments, medication, maintenance of the premises and equipment. Staff were clear about their roles, responsibilities and the ethos of the home. Staff told us the manager was very supportive and accessible and that they received regular supervision and support.