You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 June 2013
Date of Publication: 18 July 2013
Inspection Report published 18 July 2013 PDF | 100.34 KB


Inspection carried out on 12 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. This was because some people had complex needs which meant they were not always able to tell us about their experiences themselves. We spoke with three staff, four relatives and a health care professional, and we read documents and records held at the service.

Our observations showed that people were treated in a kind and respectful way by staff. They were given choices about their meals and what activities they would like to participate in. We saw many positive interactions between staff and people who lived at the service, which resulted in people showing signs of being relaxed in the company of staff and enjoying the interaction. Staff responded to people's needs promptly and were knowledgeable about peoples individual needs.

There were 23 people who lived at the service at the time of our inspection who had a wide range of needs, including some people who had complex physical and dementia care needs. People consistently told us that they liked living at Tripletrees and said that this was because it had a relaxed, friendly atmosphere and it was a comfortable place to live. One person told us “Love it here, I can do what I want when I want”. They also told us that they felt safe and that they liked the food.

Relatives spoke positively about their experiences at the service and how the service cared for their relative. They told us how attentive staff were and how well staff knew and understood the needs of their relative. A relative told us “Although the environment could do with a lick of paint the care here is excellent”.

People who lived the service told us they felt staff knew what they were doing, and that they had the skills to meet their support needs. However, not all staff had undertaken the necessary training in order to help ensure that they are able to work safely with people.

There was not a process in place to ensure that people consented to their care or had their capacity assessed to be able to consent. Not all records were being maintained to protected people from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment.