Tripletrees

Updated 24 February 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

As part of CQC's response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 3 February 2021 and was announced.

Updated 24 February 2021

This unannounced inspection took place on 13 November 2018. Tripletrees is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Tripletrees is situated in Burgess Hill in West Sussex and is the only home owned by the provider. Tripletrees is registered to accommodate 28 people. At the time of the inspection there were 28 people accommodated in one adapted building, over four floors. Each person had their own room and access to communal bathrooms. The home provided accommodation for older people and those living with dementia.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the home is run. Since the previous inspection on 27 April 2016, the provider of the home had changed. The registered manager had taken over ownership of the home. The management team consisted of the two providers, one of whom was the registered manager, and another member of staff who was the head of care. At the previous inspection the home was rated as Good. At this inspection we found the home remained Good.

People were at the heart of the registered manager’s and staff’s vision and values. The registered manager and staff held the values of love, respect, compassion and care in high-regard. These values were embedded in staff’s practice. Without exception, comments from people and their relatives were overwhelmingly positive. Comments from people’s relatives included, “The care is so good. I can sleep easily in my bed now. They even help my relative to know who I am. The carers are loving and considerate” and “You cannot beat the care and consideration they receive here. I would give them 10 out of 10. It feels like one happy family”. A healthcare professional told us, “They seem to have people’s best interests at heart”.

Thoughtful, compassionate and creative ways of enabling people to feel valued and well-cared for had been put into practice. People were asked what would make them feel content and if they had any wishes. One person had expressed sadness and anxiety about not knowing where their parent’s graves were. Staff had exceeded expectations and had searched records and cemeteries until these had been found. The person had been supported to visit and lay flowers at the graves. They were reassured and settled once they knew where their parents were.

Innovative approaches with the use of technology demonstrated that staff cared about people and wanted them to have a good-quality and enriched life. ‘Apps’ had been created and each person had their own log-in when using an electronic tablet. Dependent on people’s abilities, they could use these independently or with assistance from staff. Observations showed people enjoyed looking at this personalised facility. This included photographs of their families, or places of interest to them, their favourite television programmes and music that they liked to listen to.

People told us that they remained safe. They were protected from abuse and discrimination. Sufficient numbers of skilled staff ensured people’s physical and emotional needs were met. Risks to people’s safety were identified and mitigated. Infection control was maintained.

People’s needs were assessed and reviewed on an on-going basis. People received personalised care. People were actively involved in their care and in decisions related to it. People were supported to maintain their health. They had access to medicines, which were managed safely, and received support from external healthcare professionals when required. An external healthcare professional told us, “They really work with us to make sure people are getting good care”. People received appropriate end of life care to ensure their comfort.

People told us that they enjoyed the food. People’s access to nutrition and hydration continued to meet their needs. People had access to an environment that met their needs. Communal areas, as well as private spaces, enabled people to spend time on their own or with others.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems at the home supported this practice. People were treated with respected, their privacy and dignity was maintained.

People and relatives were involved in the running of the home. Their opinions and suggestions were respected and acted upon. People, relatives, staff and an external healthcare professional, were complimentary about the leadership and management of the home. When asked to describe this, a relative told us, “Exceptional”.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.