CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tamara House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, personal protective equipment, testing, visiting, cleaning and managing outbreaks. They were also told that measures were in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Tamara House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, flexible visiting and enough staff during a COVID-19 outbreak.
This was a targeted inspection on 17 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19. The visit was announced two days beforehand.
The home had recently experienced a COVID-19 outbreak. Inspectors were assured that it was using personal protective equipment safely, arranging testing, managing visits and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
Staffing pressures caused by self-isolation were covered by managers, activity staff, administrative staff and care staff working extra shifts. Families told inspectors that visits were accommodated and that there usually seemed to be enough staff.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Clear outbreak communication
The manager kept people, staff and families informed about the measures being used during the COVID-19 outbreak.
“During this time the manager had communicated with people, staff and families regularly to ensure everyone understood the measures put in place to help keep people safe.” from the report
Staffing cover
The home used its own management, activity, administrative and care staff to cover absences during the outbreak. Agency staff were not used.
“Management, activity and administrative staff provided care to ensure there were enough staff on duty to cover for absences, due to staff having to self-isolate.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE, testing, cleaning and visiting arrangements appropriately, and had an up-to-date infection control policy.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Relatives said visits were accommodated, including some visits requested at short notice. Visiting was taking place in line with current government guidance.
“I have never been refused a visit and on one occasion I only gave 15 minutes notice of my request to visit” from the report
Action on recommendations
The home had acted on recommendations about hand-rub pumps and cleaning cover at weekends.
“A recommendation made at a previous inspection about cleaning staff working at weekends had been actioned.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How many staff are currently available when people need to self-isolate, and what cover is used for absences?
- 02How are visits arranged now, including visits requested at short notice?
- 03What testing, PPE and outbreak arrangements are currently in place for residents, staff and visitors?
- 04How often are high-touch areas cleaned, including at weekends?
- 05How are families kept informed if there is an infection outbreak or a change in a resident's health?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 2022 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, December 2021
Rated Good overall, but inspectors found management, staffing cover and weekend cleaning needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 16 December 2021. Inspectors looked at whether the home was safe and well-led. They spoke with people, staff and managers, observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicines and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. People told inspectors they felt safe and were happy with their care. Risks were assessed, medicines were given safely and on time, and the premises were clean and well maintained during the visit.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. There had been several management changes, no registered manager was in post, and some shifts had low staffing. Inspectors also found that weekend cleaning and formal feedback had not been consistently managed.
The overall rating remained Good because this inspection only assessed Safe and Well-led. Ratings for the other key questions came from earlier comprehensive inspections.
Safe medicines
The electronic medicines system supported safe administration, and people received their medicines on time.
“People received their medicines safely and on time.” from the report
Kind relationships
People said staff were kind and helpful. Inspectors also saw staff respond promptly when people needed assistance.
“All the staff are so kind and helpful. Nothing is too much trouble.” from the report
Risk management
Risks were identified and reviewed. Staff had guidance about how to support people safely, including with mobility and skin care.
“Risks had been appropriately identified, assessed, monitored and reviewed.” from the report
Clean and maintained premises
The home, including the kitchen, was clean and well maintained during the inspection.
“At this inspection we found the premises were clean and well maintained.” from the report
Low staffing on some shifts
needs fixingThere had been periods when only two staff were on duty because of short-notice sickness. The provider said extra cover would be brought in, but staffing remained difficult.
“There had been periods of low staffing levels on some shifts.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post, following several management changes. The provider said a new manager was expected to join in February 2022.
“At the time of this inspection there was no registered manager in post.” from the report
Weekend cleaning
needs fixingThere was no cleaner at weekends, and staff did not always have time to clean high-contact points and communal areas in line with infection control guidance.
“At weekends there was no domestic staff cover.” from the report
Weak management oversight
needs fixingInspectors could not confirm whether audits had led to action. The provider had also not identified that a required paper record for some medicines was missing, although this was put in place during the inspection.
“It was not possible to evidence if opportunities to improve the service had been missed.” from the report
Limited feedback
minorPeople and relatives had not been asked for feedback about the service since the previous inspection. The provider said this was planned for the near future.
“Quality assurance surveys had not been provided for people and their families to share their views and experiences since the last inspection.” from the report
- 01Who is the registered manager now, and what management support is available at weekends?
- 02How are short-notice sickness and vacant care posts covered, and what staffing levels are normally planned for each shift?
- 03What has changed to make sure high-contact points and communal areas are cleaned every weekend?
- 04How are audits now checked and followed up so that problems are identified and fixed promptly?
- 05When were people and relatives last asked for feedback, and what changes were made as a result?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key-question ratings came from previous comprehensive inspections and were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 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 Tamara House
5 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2021GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 May 2011.
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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £980 to £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.