You are here

Archived: RNIB Tate House

The provider of this service changed - see new profile


Inspection carried out on 3 February 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

In September 2013 we carried out an inspection of this service. We judged, at that time, that improvements were needed to the way the provider notified us of incidents that occured at the home. At this inspection, we found improvements had been made and the issues we identified had been addressed.

Inspection carried out on 2 September 2013

During a routine inspection

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. People described the care and support they received as "Very helpful", "Staff come when I ring the call bell" and "Staff have a very good understanding of people's history which means they receive care that is personal to them."

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. The provider had policies in place for safeguarding and whistle-blowing which were prominently displayed within the home. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their role in protecting people from abuse.

We looked at the medicines records and stock for two people's controlled drugs and found these to be correct. We also checked the records and stock for a range of other medicines for five people. Records were complete and medicines could be accounted for. Our checks found the stock levels corresponded with the medication administration records (MARs).

Records showed that people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

Appropriate arrangements were not in place for the reporting of incidents at Tate House. We have asked the provider to address this issue.

Inspection carried out on 27 November 2012

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with said they made their own decisions and choices about how they lived their life. People's needs were assessed and staff understood the support that people had consented to receive. A person said �I live the life I choose to. I am as happy as I could be.� We saw people were treated with dignity and respect and their rights were being protected.

People had care plans and risk assessments in place to help to protect their wellbeing. Staff helped people to maintain their independence. A person said �We have a key worker. They come and have a chat with me about my care. Any help I need it is there when I need it.� People's needs were known and were being met.

There were policies and procedures in place to help to protect people from abuse. Any issues raised were offered to the local authorities safeguarding of vulnerable adults team. This helped to protect people.

During our visit we saw that there was enough staff to help and support people. Staff confirmed they had the right skills to meet people�s needs and said there were enough of them to provide care in a timely way. A person living at the home said �There are enough staff .They know what they are doing.�

People were able to raise issues and make complaints. We saw evidence which confirmed that the management team acted upon any issues raised to make sure that people remained happy with the service they received.

Inspection carried out on 7 December 2011

During a routine inspection

People who live at the home told us that the home was comfortable and they had everything they needed in their own rooms. They also told us the food was good and they were always offered a choice from the menu. People remarked that there was a good continuity of staff and some of the staff had been at the home a long time.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)