Archived: Sandhurst Residential Care Home

Updated 12 February 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place over two days on 31 December 2015 and 6 January 2016. Our first visit was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We reviewed a range of other information to identify good practice and potential areas of concern. This included previous inspection reports and other information held by the Care Quality Commission (CQC), such as statutory notifications. Providers are required to submit notifications to the CQC about events and incidents that occur including deaths, any person with a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) authorisation and any safeguarding matters.

During our inspection, we met with all of the people living at Sandhurst; we spoke at length with eight of them to hear their experiences and views of the service. We also spoke with: six relatives; two friends; 11 staff members, including the registered manager, care staff, cook, housekeeper and maintenance person; and one visiting health care professional.

We observed care and support in communal areas and reviewed documentation concerned with how the service was managed. This included looking at three people’s care and medicine records, three staff recruitment files, staff training records, minutes of meetings, complaints/compliments and a range of other quality monitoring information.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Following the inspection, we sought feedback from five health and social care professionals who supported people who lived at Sandhurst. We received two responses.

Updated 12 February 2016

Sandhurst Residential Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 23 older people who may be living with dementia, a mental illness or a learning disability. There were 20 people living at the home at the time of our visits.

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 31 December 2015 and 6 January 2016. The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Safety Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

We last inspected Sandhurst on 18 June 2014. At that inspection we found the provider was meeting all the regulations.

On the days of our inspection, there was a homely and friendly atmosphere at Sandhurst. People were relaxed and comfortable and enjoyed living there.

People felt safe and looked after. Risks to individuals were assessed and planned to restrict people as little as possible. They had choices in their everyday lives and had their care and support planned in the way they wished to receive it.

Care staff had an understanding of the Mental capacity Act (2005) and how it applied to their practice. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been made for those people who required it.

People were supported by care staff who had been recruited safely. They were trained and supervised to do their jobs properly. They felt motivated and supported in their work by the registered manager.

Care staff knew people well and what was important to them. They were kind, caring and compassionate to people but had a friendly approach. Care staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

People’s health needs were addressed and specialist advice sought when required. People received the medicines they were prescribed. However, when people had prescribed creams given, these were not recorded.

People were very happy with the variety and type of food they received. They received additional snacks and drinks when they wanted them.

Relatives and friends were encouraged to visit and made to feel welcome by care staff. Activities took place but these did not always meet people’s individual needs, abilities and interests; particularly those people living with dementia.

People knew how to make a complaint and felt they would be listened to. There was a complaints policy and procedure in place but this did not include all the available professionals to contact should people need to.

Some areas of the home required attention to make it more comfortable for people to live in, for example the chairs in the communal areas.

People and relative’s views were actively sought and acted upon through questionnaires, newsletters and coffee mornings.

There were some quality monitoring systems in place but these did not address all the areas required to review and continually improve the service.