Tender Loving Care South West

“People were supported by one or two members of staff with visit durations varying from 20 minutes to 1 hour. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 17 people.”

“The assessment looked at 3 of the key questions; safe, responsive and well-led. We have rated the service requires improvement in safe and well led and good in responsive. This gives an overall rating of requires improvement.”

“Staff were not recruited safely and necessary checks to ensure people were safe and suitable for employment in the care sector had not been completed before they were permitted to work independently. This unnecessarily exposed people to significant risk of harm. The provider was in breach of the regulation relating to recruitment.”

“Staff new to the care sector had not been supported to complete the care certificate and supervision had not been regularly provided for senior staff. Following the inspection, we received assurances this had been addressed.”

“The service had made decisions in people’s best interest when they lacked capacity to make decisions for themselves. These decision-making processes had not always been documented. Following feedback this issue was promptly addressed.”

“Staff understood their roles in ensuring people were protected from abuse and were confident the registered manager would take action to address and resolve any safety concerns they reported.”

“The service employed sufficient staff to meet people’s assessed needs. There had been no recent missed visits, staff normally arrived on time and provided support at a relaxed pace.”

“People were safely supported with their medicines and staff used Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as required to manage infection control risks.”

“People’s care needs were assessed and identified before support was provided. People’s care plans had been recently updated and now contained sufficient guidance to enable staff to meet their individual needs. However, care plans lacked information detailing how people’s previous experiences impacted on their current needs.”

“The service’s governance and quality assurance system were not sufficiently robust, and the role and responsibilities of leaders were not well defined. The provider was in breach of the regulation relating to governance.”

“However, the registered manager was engaging positively with the local authority quality assurance team and took prompt action to address issues identified during the inspection.”

“ ”