CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tamar House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Care plans and risk assessments were in place, staff understood people's risks, and medicines were administered using safe procedures. Inspectors noted one discrepancy about skin integrity, which the manager addressed immediately.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found quality checks, feedback systems and an action plan for improvement. People, relatives and staff said the manager was approachable and the home was well managed.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Tamar House is Rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, but noted staffing pressures and records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 3 July 2023, with inspection activity continuing until 19 July 2023. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files and management records.
The inspection looked only at Safe and Well-led because concerns had been raised about staffing and management. Both areas were rated Good. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, medicines were given safely, and staff understood people's risks and needs.
The home was using agency staff because of staffing difficulties, although recruitment and induction were taking place. Inspectors also found some discrepancies in care records and issues with recording in care plans and daily notes. The manager had identified these issues and was taking action.
The overall rating remained Good. Ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were not assessed during this inspection and were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection in 2018.
People felt safe
People and relatives said staff made them feel safe. Staff knew people's needs and the steps in place to reduce risks.
“People and their relatives told us the care provided by staff reassured them and made them feel safe.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff were assessed as competent to give medicines. Inspectors found secure storage, suitable temperatures and records showing oral medicines were given as prescribed.
“Staff had been assessed as competent to give people their medicines.” from the report
Active management
The manager used audits, feedback and an action plan to identify and address problems. A new role was also being introduced to improve oversight of records.
“A quality assurance system was in place to support driving change and continual improvement to the quality and standard of care.” from the report
Open communication
Families said they were contacted promptly when incidents happened. The home also used newsletters, meetings and surveys to gather views.
“Families told us the registered manager and staff contacted them promptly when incidents occurred.” from the report
Staffing pressures
needs fixingThe home had been relying on agency staff to fill staffing gaps. Recruitment and training were under way, but families should check whether this remains the case.
“Agency staff had been utilised to address the challenges experienced by the provider in staffing.” from the report
Care records needed improvement
needs fixingInspectors found a discrepancy in one person's records about skin integrity. An audit also found problems with care plans and daily notes, and further training was planned.
“An audit completed by the registered manager had identified issues within recording in care plans and daily notes which required improvement.” from the report
- 01How many agency staff are currently being used, and has the staffing shortage been resolved?
- 02What checks now ensure care plans and daily notes are complete and accurate?
- 03How are staff trained and checked as competent before giving medicines?
- 04What progress has been made with the action plan and the new role overseeing records?
- 05When will the home next review the care plan and risk assessment information for my relative?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection in 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 August 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Tamar House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and found practical support for visitors and residents.
This was a targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, including visiting, isolation, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and outbreak planning.
Inspectors said they were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, supporting testing and following shielding and social distancing rules. They were also assured that the infection control policy was up to date.
The report gives no overall quality rating. The safe question was inspected but not rated, so this report does not show how the home performs in areas such as care, staffing, kindness or leadership.
Hospital returns
People returning from hospital had risks assessed, with families and GPs involved. The home put support in place where isolation increased risks such as falling or not eating.
“The people who lived in the service had assessments on risks to their wellbeing when returning from hospital and had to self-isolate in their bedroom.” from the report
Visiting shelter
The home had built a shelter to protect relatives from bad weather during visits.
“There was a shelter built against the window of the dining room to protect relatives against the weather when they visited the people who lived in the service.” from the report
Keeping families informed
Relatives could see photographs and videos of activities through a restricted social media page.
“A restricted social media page had been set up for photographs and videos of activities of people who lived in the service for their relatives to see and keep up to date with how they were.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors found good stocks of personal protective equipment, with more storage being arranged so supplies could be bought in bulk.
“There were good stocks of personal protective equipment (PPE) with off site storage being sourced so items could be bulk bought.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently assessing risks for people returning from hospital, especially risks of falling or not eating?
- 02How are relatives currently able to visit, and what arrangements are in place if the weather is poor?
- 03How do you currently keep relatives updated about activities and the wellbeing of people living here?
- 04What stocks of personal protective equipment and testing arrangements do you have now?
- 05How do you currently prevent and manage infection outbreaks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Tamar House
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 April 2016.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.