Archived: Trinity House Care Centre

Trinity House is home to 25 older people who live there and also four people who use the respite beds after leaving hospital. There were 29 people at home on the day of our inspection. We observed people during the day. We talked with the manager and the quality assurance manager. We looked in detail at the care records of four people. We visited on a weekday and we spoke with five relatives. We spoke with two people and four members of staff. One member of staff told us, 'It's well run, the manager is good, and she runs a tight ship. First and foremost this place is the resident's home.'

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes the records we looked at and what people using the service and staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in an environment that was safe and clean. Staff records demonstrated that core training was up to date and that staff were trained sufficiently to meet the needs of people who lived there. Staff were trained in caring for people with dementia and safeguarding. Staff understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported. One relative told us, 'They are all friendly here, if you want to discuss anything it's fine. We're quite happy.'

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people who lived at the home. There were procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse. The staff and manager had a good understanding of whistle blowing policies. Risk assessments and health and safety measures were in place to keep people safe. There was a robust auditing process for medication administration.

The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. We saw that proper policies and procedures were in place. The manager had an understanding of these safeguards which ensured people's rights and choices were protected.

Is the service effective?

Relatives told us that they were happy with the care that was delivered and that people's needs were met. It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people living at the home. The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care safely and effectively. We saw that people were treated with dignity and care.

Care plans specified people's individual needs, for example, a person's mobility, or food requirements. One member of staff told us, 'I would want a relative of mine to move in here.' All the people we spoke with told us they were satisfied with the care and support they received.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. Staff took into account the complex needs of people when planning activities and the home had an activity coordinator. A relative told us "I think it's nice. The carers are friendly and have a joke. Mom is looked after as best as she can be." Staff said that they were happy with the level of professional and emotional support they received from the management team.

We saw the staff and manager were patient and gave encouragement when they supported people. All staff were aware of peoples choices, preferences and support needs. We found the care and support was delivered with dignity and respect. One member of staff told us, 'I'd recommend here, the residents are cared for properly.'

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. Records confirmed people's preferences and interests had been noted and were used to help staff understand each person's personality and emotional state. People had access to activities that were important to them and were supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives.

There were cooks and domestic staff to ensure good food was provided and the environment was clean. We saw clear and detailed recording that ensured the manager could make timely and informed decisions about a person's care and support. A member of staff told us, 'The managers react really quickly. They sorted out something straight away. The manager is really good, she has really helped me. I'm happy with the care we give here.'

Is the service well-led?

We saw that the home was part of a larger organisation that supported the manager. A relative told us "It's really good here. The staff are always really lovely." Staff told us that they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and that management support was of a high standard and helped them to do their job effectively.

The manager was aware of their responsibilities in meeting the essential standards of quality and safety. The systems in place to ensure the quality of the service was regularly assessed and monitored were robust. There was a clear structure of supervision responsibilities within the staff team. Staff had regular training and learning opportunities.

We saw that staff treated people with respect and dignity. A relative said "They're terrific. He never complains about anything." People told us and we saw that choices were offered and that people's views were sought and acted upon.

All the staff spoken with were able to tell us about people's needs and how they ensured that people received care in a way that they preferred. People who lived at the home were supported to take part in activities that were interesting and stimulating so that they had a meaningful lifestyle.

We saw that people were relaxed in their environment and that systems were in place to keep them safe from harm. Staff knew their responsibilities in respect of protecting people and the actions they needed to take. This meant that people were protected from harm.

The systems for the management of medicines did not ensure that there were records in place to show that people had received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff received a range of training so that they had up to date knowledge and skills in

order to support the people who lived in the home. Staff told us they felt supported to carry out their roles.

There were systems in place to monitor how the home was run and ensured people received a quality service.