We carried out a review of the data available to us about Tower View Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Tower View Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Tower View is a care home for people living with mental health needs. Three people were living in the home at the time of the inspection.
What life is like for people using this service:
• People were positive about the care they received and about the quality of staff.
• People were supported make choices and have as much control and independence as possible.
• People had been supported to develop care plans that were specific to them. These plans were regularly reviewed with people to keep them up to date.
• People received caring and compassionate support from kind and committed staff.
• Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.
• People felt safe and received support to take their medicines safely.
• Risks to people’s well-being and safety were assessed, recorded and kept up to date. Staff supported people to manage these risks effectively.
• People’s rights to make their own decisions were respected. People were supported to maintain a good diet and access the health services they needed.
• The registered manager provided good support for staff to be able to do their job effectively.
• The provider’s quality assurance processes were effective and resulted in improvements to the service.
More information is in Detailed Findings below.
Rating at last inspection:
Good. Report published 9 August 2016.
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up:
We will monitor all intelligence we receive about the service to inform when the next inspection should take place.
This inspection took place on 25 July 2016 and was unannounced.
The provider was an individual who was in day to day charge of the service. The service does not have a condition of registration that they need to have a registered manager in place, because the provider was undertaking that role.
People who use the service were positive about the support they received and praised the quality of the staff and management. People told us they felt safe and were involved in developing and reviewing their support plans. Comments from people included, “I feel safe here. I could talk to any of the staff if I had any concerns and they would help me” and “The staff are good. I can’t think of anything I could criticise”. We observed people interacting with staff in a relaxed and confident manner.
Staff understood the needs of the people they were supporting. People told us staff provided support with kindness and compassion. Comments included, “There are enough staff around and we can get hold of them when we need to” and “I’m able to speak with staff whenever I need to”. We observed staff interacting with people in a friendly and respectful way. Staff respected people’s choices and privacy and responded to requests for support. A mental health professional we received feedback from told us staff provided good support for people and said the service had a good reputation with the mental health team.
Staff were appropriately trained and skilled. They received a thorough induction when they started working for the service. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities, as well as the values and philosophy of the service. Staff had completed training to ensure the care and support provided to people met their needs.
The service was responsive to people’s needs and wishes. People had regular group and individual meetings to provide feedback and there were effective complaints procedures. Comments included, “I can talk to any of the staff if I have any concerns. They help to resolve any problems” and “If I had any concerns I would speak to my keyworker or (the provider). They would sort anything out”.
The provider assessed and monitored the quality of care. The service encouraged feedback from people and their relatives, which they used to make improvements.
The person we spoke with told us they made day to day decisions regarding what they did and what they ate. They explained they would talk to their relatives or staff if they had to consent to decisions such as having a flu vaccination.
We looked around the premises to see if people lived in a clean and hygienic environment. All of the areas of the home we saw were clean and infection prevention protocols on place.
We found the organisation had effective recruitment practices to assure staff employed were able to work with people safely and effectively. Both of the relatives we spoke with said the staff were friendly and kind. One relative described the staff to 'certainly know what they are doing, we don't have any issues at all.'
People we contacted knew who to approach if they had any concerns or complaints.
People told us they were asked what activities they would like to do and encouraged to take part if they wished to do so.
People told us they were offered a variety of choices in their day, from what activities were on offer to what to eat.
People told us they received support from health care professionals outside the home and said they had recent contact with their care managers from social services.
Everyone we spoke with was very complimentary about the staff. Examples of comments were, "we know the staff well, they are very caring and encourage me to do things, but allow me time to do my own things as well."
Everyone we spoke with told us they were confident if they reported any problems, they would be dealt with.
There are no staff on duty at night. One person told us they knew what to do if they needed help but another person could not. There were no risk assessments for people about the lack of staff at night.