Tandy Court

This inspection was prompted by reviewing information we held about the service and to follow up on the breach of regulation found at our last inspection.
Processes were in place to help keep people safe and protect them from harm. Staff understood risks associated with people’s care. Environmental and equipment checks took place regularly to support people’s needs and ensure they were kept safe. Staffing levels were regularly checked to make sure they were sufficient to support people’s needs.

Staff members had access to ongoing training to develop their skills. The provider had governance systems to monitor the quality of the service and support any required learning or development for staff members. Management ensured staff attended regular supervision meetings to support their needs and maintain the quality of the service. Staff administered medicines as prescribed to support people’s healthcare needs. Cleaning of the home took place regularly and systems in place supported infection prevention and control.

At our last inspection, the rating for this service was requires improvement and there was a breach of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found the provider had made the necessary improvements and were no longer in breach of the regulations.

People's experience:

People and/or their family members were involved in the assessment of people’s needs to ensure these could be met. Assessments considered people’s individual communication needs as well as personal and healthcare needs. People’s care was regularly reviewed and changes made as needed. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff. People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy and had a choice of meals. Special diets were made available to those who required them. People felt at ease to raise any concerns if they needed to and where confident action would be taken and improvements made. Records of people’s needs were shared when required with other agencies to support the best outcomes and ensure the safe transition of people when moving services or attending hospital appointments. People had access to some activities of interest to support them to stay physically and mentally active. Staff knew people well. People told us staff understood their care and treatment needs, and advised they were asked for their consent before care was provided. People spoke positively of living at the home and of the staff, including management. People said they were treated with patience and respect. One person told us, “I feel safe here all of the time.” People made daily living choices related to their care and support and were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. Staff worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. One relative told us, “It is a lovely, lovely place and I would have no problems in going there myself, they are very friendly, and they look after [name of person] well. [person] are adapting to going into care and it is very difficult; I think they are doing an excellent job”.