Tenby House

We found 1 new breach of regulation relating to safe care and treatment.

Some aspects of medicines were not managed safely. A medicine that required secure storage was found to be unlabelled leading to the risk of misappropriation or misuse of this drug which potentially put people at risk. The medicine was due to be returned to the pharmacy. The staff member giving people their lunchtime medicines failed to sanitise their hands which put people at risk of infection.

There was a culture of learning when accidents or incidents occurred. Safe systems ensured staff worked collaboratively with a range of professionals to provide consistent and co-ordinated care. Safeguarding requirements were met, and any instances of abuse or alleged abuse were notified appropriately to the local authority and the Commission. Apart from some aspects in the management of medicines, people’s risks were assessed and managed safely. The home provided a safe, clean environment. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s care and support needs, and staff completed a range of training in line with their roles.

People’s needs were assessed before they moved into the home, and a range of monitoring tools was used to support the care they received from staff. A variety of health and social care professionals supported people to live healthier lives, and to achieve good outcomes. People’s consent to care was routinely sought by staff.

People were cared for by kind and compassionate staff who knew them well; their dignity was respected. People were encouraged with their independence, and there were no restrictions on people receiving visits. The home supported staff with their wellbeing and regular supervisions, enabling staff to make suggestions or voice any concerns.

People received personalised care that catered for their likes, dislikes and preferences. Care plans provided information for staff about how people wished to be cared for. Staff completed training in equality and diversity and demonstrated their understanding in practice. Staff also completed training in end-of-life care.

The culture of the home shaped the environment, the quality of care and daily life for people and staff. A positive culture had been developed that was focused on person-centred care and giving people dignity and choice on what was important to them. A robust system of audits monitored the home overall and was used to drive improvements, although the issues we found with regard to the management of medicines had not been identified through the provider’s audits.