Sandrock House Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to outstanding. This meant services were tailored to meet the needs of individuals and delivered to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care.
 

This service scored 89 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider was exceptional at making sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.
The service demonstrated outstanding person-centred care. Staff had an in-depth understanding of each individual and consistently tailored support to reflect people’s preferences, communication needs, life histories and aspirations. People were supported to live meaningful lives based on what mattered to them, including accessing community activities, maintaining relationships and enjoying meaningful events. Staff promoted independence by supporting individuals to take part in daily living tasks such as cooking, shopping and gardening at their own pace. Positive risk-taking was encouraged to help people build confidence and try new experiences. Staff were strong advocates for people. They challenged and escalated concerns when proposed care arrangements did not meet people’s needs and worked in partnership with health professionals to ensure concerns were fully explored. Where necessary, staff persisted to ensure people received appropriate assessments, treatment and outcomes. One professional said, “The service often reaches out to us and with queries and gives up updates on potential issues which they handle effectively.” Another professional said, “Individualised care is impressive and there was nothing negative to share about the service, it’s a brilliant care home.”

The provider had a clear understanding of people’s health and care needs and worked with local services to ensure care was joined up, consistent and responsive.
Continuity of care was supported by a stable staff team who knew people well. The service had not used agency staff for a considerable time, which helped ensure consistency in how care was delivered and supported the development of positive relationships between staff and people.
Effective communication systems were in place, including handovers, resident and relative meetings and team meetings. These enabled staff to share information, respond to changes in people’s needs and support continuity of care.

The provider ensured people and those important to them were provided with clear, accessible and timely information to support their understanding and involvement in care. Staff communicated with people in ways that met their individual needs, using appropriate methods to ensure information was understood. This supported people to make informed choices about their daily lives and care.
Staff demonstrated an awareness of the importance of clear communication and described how they adapted their approach depending on the person. This included using simple language, giving people time to process information and checking understanding.
Relatives told us they were kept well informed and communication was consistent and effective. One relative told us staff had, “good communication and relationships,” which demonstrated the provider maintained open and transparent communication with those involved in people’s care.
Information sharing systems were well established, including regular updates, discussions and records, which ensured staff and stakeholders had access to relevant and up-to-date information. This meant people, relatives and professionals were well informed, supporting safe, coordinated and person-centred care.

The provider was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.
People were encouraged to express their views, contribute to decisions and influence how the service operated. The provider acted on people’s views and created meaningful opportunities for them to shape their home.
Six residents formed a resident subcommittee which met every eight weeks. People used these meetings to discuss areas including menus, activities, staff and the environment, including what they felt was working well and what could be improved. The manager attended the meetings and responded to people’s questions. This provided people with a direct forum to influence decisions about their home and demonstrated the value placed on their experience and views.
People were also directly involved in the recruitment of staff. Residents had told the provider they wanted an opportunity to meet prospective staff before recruitment decisions were made. In response, two residents were invited to participate in interviews once confidential information had been addressed. They asked candidates questions and shared their views about whether they felt candidates would be suitable to work at the service. The provider considered residents’ views alongside experience and qualifications when making recruitment decisions. This gave people a meaningful role in influencing who supported them.
The provider encouraged relatives to contribute to the development of people’s care, with the person’s consent. Relatives could arrange appointments with the manager or deputy manager to review care plans and suggest changes or additions they felt would benefit their family member. This provided a clear opportunity for people important to residents to share their knowledge and contribute to decisions about care and support.
The provider also demonstrated a willingness to listen when things did not go as planned. Managers described discussing lessons learned as a team rather than limiting discussions to management. Monthly multidisciplinary team meetings supported this approach and provided an opportunity to consider issues collectively and identify how outcomes could be improved.
Feedback from residents and relatives was gathered through surveys and meetings. The provider said ideas raised through this feedback were considered and shared through monthly newsletters. This provided a further mechanism for people to contribute ideas and for information about developments within the service to be shared.
The provider’s approach went beyond simply collecting feedback. People had direct opportunities to influence the staff recruited to support them, contribute to decisions about their home and shape their care. The provider listened to people’s views and created structures where their experience could inform decisions and improvements demonstrating an inclusive culture where people were valued as active participants in their service rather than passive recipients of care.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.
Staff worked hard to reduce barriers and support people to ensure they were not discriminated against due to their disabilities. People had access to support that promoted equality, removed barriers or delays, and protected their rights. The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, considering the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments. The provider prioritised resources and created opportunities to tackle inequalities and achieve equity of access.
External stakeholders provided positive feedback about the care provided and found the staff team communicated well with them and responded to any information request promptly.

The provider was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were actively encouraged and supported to take part in new, meaningful and enriching experiences that reflected their interests, preferences and aspirations.
Staff and leaders demonstrated an innovative and reflective approach to understanding the needs of people who may be at increased risk of inequality in experiences or outcomes. They actively gathered and used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment, ensuring responses were individualised and responsive to people’s circumstances. For example, staff supported one person to access social environments from which they would otherwise have been excluded in a way that respected their identity and promoted comfort and trust. Staff ensured they felt valued, understood and at ease in their chosen community.
The provider values were evident in staff interactions and in the way, support was personalised to minimise the risk of unequal outcomes. Staff told us they felt supported to use their skills confidently, without fear of discrimination, harassment or unfair treatment. This contributed to a positive, inclusive working culture and enabled staff to focus on delivering compassionate, person centred care.
Leaders ensured that equity was embedded not only in policy but as an integral part of service development and day to day practice. Staff were encouraged to share their experiences, perspectives and ideas for improvement. This collaborative approach ensured that support remained relevant, meaningful and impactful, and helped create an environment where Sandrock House was inclusive and equitable for everyone.

People were given exceptional support to plan for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. The provider demonstrated a strong and sustained commitment to high-quality end of life care through its work with the Gold Standards Framework (GSF). GSF is a practical, evidence-based quality improvement programme which supports health and social care teams to provide proactive, personalised and coordinated care for people approaching the end of life. Its accreditation provides external recognition that high-quality end of life care has been embedded within a service.
The provider had worked towards the GSF since 2017, achieving platinum reaccreditation in 2021 and a further hallmark award in 2025. The service had also been shortlisted for a palliative care award, providing further recognition of staff’s commitment to improving end of life care.
The provider’s approach extended beyond meeting people’s clinical needs. Staff described supporting people to remain comfortable, respecting their wishes and taking account of their religious needs. Relatives were offered time, privacy and reassurance during the final stages of their loved one’s life. The provider had created a room where relatives could stay with their loved one during their final days, with meals, washing facilities and emotional support available. This enabled families to remain close to the person and receive support from staff throughout this important period. The provider also recognised the importance of continuing to support relatives after a person had died. Staff contacted relatives a few days after a death to check how they were and whether they needed further support. Each year, relatives of people who had died were invited to a celebration of life at the service. A candle was lit for each person who had died, providing an opportunity for families, staff and other residents to remember them and share memories.
The provider also recognised the emotional impact of bereavement on staff and other residents. Staff were offered one-to-one time to talk about their feelings and remember the person, while staff who needed time away from work following a bereavement were supported to do so.
The provider’s sustained commitment to the GSF, external recognition of its end-of-life care and the practical support offered to people and their families demonstrated an exceptional approach which was embedded in the homes culture. People were supported not only to receive high-quality care during the final stages of their lives, but to remain surrounded by the people, relationships and values important to them. Relatives continued to receive compassionate support after a person’s death, demonstrating a whole-person and whole-family approach to end of life care.