Archived: Tarry Hill

Updated 5 November 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on the 12 July 2016 and was unannounced. It was carried out by two inspectors.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information available to us about the home, such as the notifications that they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

Before the inspection visit we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. This was returned in a timely manner.

During the inspection we spoke with three people, four staff members, the deputy manager and the manager. We observed how care was delivered and reviewed the care records and risk assessments. We checked medicines administration records and reviewed how complaints were managed. We looked at four staff recruitment records and staff training records. We also reviewed information on how the quality of the service was monitored and managed.

Updated 5 November 2016

At the last inspection carried out in July 2015 there were three breaches of Regulations. The provider sent an action plan to show how they were going to resolve these breaches and we found they had been successfully addressed at this inspection.

Tarry Hill is registered to provide personal care for up to 26 people, which may include some people living with learning disabilities. This inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 July 2016. At the time of our inspection there were 13 people living there.

The service did not have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons.’ Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The manager had applied to CQC for registration.

There was sufficient trained staff to meet people’s needs and wishes. However some staff worked long hours and there was no system in place to ensure this working pattern did not have a detrimental effect on people or staff.

During our inspection visit we observed that staff were friendly and approachable. They spent time sitting with people to offer them comfort or stimulation. We observed staff delivering care which met people’s individual needs and which supported them in a respectful and appropriate way.

There were training and processes in place for staff to follow to keep people safe and staff followed these. People’s physical and mental health was promoted. Staff were trained to care for people living with learning disabilities. Medicines were stored appropriately and were administered and recorded as prescribed.

We saw staff ensured people were stimulated and had a varied social life and had the opportunity to pursue their hobbies. We saw people were supported in a relaxed and unhurried manner. Staff were caring and communicated well with people. People were offered a variety of healthy food and drinks.

There was sufficient staff to care for people and they focused on people they were caring for rather than the task they were carrying out. Staff spoke in a positive manner about the people they cared for and had taken the time to get to know people’s preferences and wishes. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and this was demonstrated in their responses to people and recognition of when people required additional support.

People’s privacy was respected and when people needed private time it was promoted. People also had their independence and dignity promoted. Where possible they were offered choice on how they wanted their care delivered and were given choices throughout the day. Staff responded to body language of people who were without verbal communication.

People were supported to maintain relationships with family and friends. Visitors were welcomed at any time. At the time of our inspection visit there were no visitors to the service.

Records we looked at were personalised and included decisions people had made about their care including their likes, dislikes and personal preferences. There was a varied activity programme for people based on individual preferences, or time in pursuit of personal hobbies or interests

The service was managed in an inclusive manner. People and staff had their wishes and knowledge respected. Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities for people’s care. The manager had systems in place to review the service and to ensure the service responded to people’s on going needs.