Tanglewood Mews

Updated 10 April 2024

Date of assessment 25 April 2024 – 2 May 2024. Tanglewood Mews is registered to provide accommodation for people who require personal care. The service specialises in providing care to adults with a learning disability and autistic people. This was a responsive assessment due to the length of time since the last inspection and receiving concerns in relation to the care provided. We looked at 14 quality statements. At our last inspection published on 7 April 2021, the service was rated good overall, with a rating of requires improvement in Well Led. At this assessment we found no evidence of poor care being provided or concerns with safeguarding. There was enough staff on duty to keep people safe. Medicines were not always managed well. Recording of administration was not clear and procedures were not followed when people took their medicines out with them. Some activities had been taking place, but people told us they would like to do more and go out more. Records of accidents and incidents were not robust to give the manager oversight and to ensure lessons were learned. Records and the process of decisions made with people were not completed effectively. Staff recruitment and training needed more robust records regarding checks and training needs. Staff were not always receiving supervision, appraisal, and induction. The provider, manager and staff worked well with healthcare professionals. We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people.

Updated 10 April 2024

People and their relatives told us they received the right, safe support. People were not always supported to reach goals and improve their life skills. People were supported to reduce periods of distress. People were relaxed with staff and assured by their presence. People and their relatives told us they received the right care. However feedback was mixed; one person told us they would like to go out more and a relative told us, “The activities are limited – (there is a) lack of transport. Another told us, “I have asked what activities there is and for photos, there’s been very few.” Healthcare professionals told us the service had improved and was providing the right care to people. People said the staff were kind and caring. Peoples feedback about the culture at the service was mixed. One relative told us, “It’s brilliant, best thing we ever did” and another told us, “Communication could be better.” People were not always involved in decisions that affected their own home such as staff recruitment.