CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Trinity Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm and there were enough staff. Inspectors found that alarms were not available on the first day and some community risk assessments were incomplete, but these issues were addressed during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received person-centred assessments, staff were trained and people had access to health care. Not all staff supervisions were up to date, with completion planned by June 2019.
- Caring?
- Good
- People, relatives and professionals described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Staff involved people in decisions and encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and communication requirements. People were supported to access the community, take part in activities and attend regular review meetings.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management was described as approachable and supportive, with regular safety and quality checks. The home was reviewing how actions from audits were brought together and had not yet sent out a staff quality questionnaire.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Trinity Court is rated Good; inspectors found caring, effective support, with some safety and staff-record issues fixed or being addressed during the visit.
Inspectors visited on 8 and 9 May 2019. They spoke with five people, two health professionals, two relatives by telephone, managers and seven staff. They also reviewed care files, medicines records, risk assessments, staff files, complaints and quality checks.
People said they were happy and felt safe. Staff were described as kind, friendly and knowledgeable. Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely, people were supported to build independence, and care was personalised to their needs and goals.
There were some problems at the start of the inspection. Portable alarms were not available, and some community risk assessments had not been completed. The home addressed these during the inspection by buying interim alarms and completing a community access protocol and individual assessments. Some staff supervisions were also overdue.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first published inspection and rating for the service.
Personalised support
Care plans were personalised and updated when needs changed. Staff knew people's preferences and supported them to achieve goals and positive outcomes.
“Goals set for people had been achieved and led to positive outcomes.” from the report
Promoting independence
The service focused on helping people learn life skills, make choices and take part in community activities.
“Promoting independence was important to staff and supported people to live fulfilled lives.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Administration was carried out by trained and assessed nurses.
“We found that the service had implemented safe systems and processes which meant people received their medicines in line with best practice.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health professionals, local authorities and other providers during admissions, reviews and transitions.
“They work well in partnership with us, they keep in touch, there is good communication and information is readily shared” from the report
Alarms were not available at first
needs fixingOn the first inspection day, staff did not have portable alarms to summon help within the home. Interim personal alarms were bought by the second day, while a longer-term call bell improvement was being considered.
“On day one portable alarms were not available to staff.” from the report
Some community risk assessments were missing
needs fixingRisk assessments had not initially been completed for people needing one-to-one or two-to-one staff support in the community. The management team completed these and introduced a community access protocol during the inspection.
“risk assessments for people requiring 1:1 and 2:1 support in the community had not been completed.” from the report
Staff supervisions were overdue
minorNot all staff supervision meetings were up to date. Managers said these would be completed by June 2019.
“However, we found that not all supervisions were up to date.” from the report
Debriefs with residents needed development
minorStaff took part in debriefs after behavioural incidents, but the manager said debriefs with people had not taken place. The manager identified this as work for the future.
“Having these meetings with people would enable them to learn and identify emotions, behaviours and actions they may take in future” from the report
- 01What permanent changes were made to the call bell or alarm system after interim personal alarms were bought?
- 02How are risks assessed and reviewed for people who need one-to-one or two-to-one support in the community?
- 03Were all overdue staff supervisions completed by June 2019?
- 04Do people now take part in debrief meetings after behavioural incidents?
- 05Have the staff quality questionnaire and people's survey been completed, and what changes resulted?
This was a scheduled inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, records, staffing, medicines and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 June 2019 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 Trinity Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 June 2018.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Wolverhampton
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.