Tenby House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider consistently treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People and their relatives commented on the kindness and sensitivity of staff. One relative confirmed their family member was treated with dignity and compassion and said, “I feel staff know him well. He’s treated with care and respect.” A healthcare professional told us, “The residents are always treated with dignity and respect during my time there.”

We observed staff interacting with people in the lounge. People said how fond they were of staff members and they were greeted warmly by staff. People hugged other people when they came into the lounge. Staff were quick to notice if people needed anything, such as assistance with adjusting their clothes. One lady who had just returned from the hairdressers was complimented by staff.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s spiritual, cultural and diverse needs were catered for. Staff told us about 1 person who was Catholic and how they shared prayers together. Some people attended church services. A relative said, “They have Mass here or they go out to church.” We learned of another person who had a sight impairment and was offered adaptive utensils to help them to eat independently. However, the person chose not to accept the offer and their preference was respected. A relative told us, “Staff are brilliant. All the staff are good. They know how to treat him. They change the subject if he gets upset. They know him as a person.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. For example, staff encouraged people to make choices about their meals and supported them to eat independently where possible, offering prompts and reassurance when needed. One person thought they had already had their lunch and said they did not want another. A staff member placed the tray in front of them, and the person ate the dessert with evident enthusiasm.

We asked staff how they helped people to remain independent. One staff member said, “I would just inform them about the task and then try to prompt and encourage them on what to do. People have their daily routines.”

There was a range of activities and social events for people. One person said, “You can join in the singing and dancing and the laughing. We’re all happy. I ain’t got time to be bored!” A relative told us, “They have 2 lady singers and he gets up and has a dance. They have quizzes. They always have something for St Patrick’s Day for him and he gets out for little trips. He goes to church and for haircuts. He could have them here, but he likes to go to the barbers.”

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed that away from the lounge some people did not always receive timely assistance. One person had walked away with another person’s slipper, but staff did not notice. Another person was walking with difficulty back and forth in the corridor and they appeared distressed. Staff did not talk with them or try to assist them. The person’s relative advised that this family member seemed compelled to walk and added, “She is having one of her bad days.” We observed 1 person wanted to go out of the front door, but they were told by staff they could not do this as the door did not open. A little later this person saw the front door open which resulted in them asking again if they could go out. Staff intervened and told them they could not go out rather than using distraction techniques. The person was visibly annoyed at being told they could not leave.

The provider supported staff to deliver person-centred care and promoted their wellbeing.

Staff were encouraged to share any concerns they might have with senior staff. One staff member said, “Staff will listen if I have a problem, like help us writing notes and guide us on what to do.” Staff meetings provided opportunities for staff to make suggestions or share information. Staff had face to face supervisions with an external consultant, as the provider felt this would enable staff to speak freely.