Sandiacre Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Assessments of people's needs had been carried prior to people using the service and involved the person and, where appropriate, their relatives and healthcare professionals, to ensure the service was able meet the person's needs and preferences. Care plans and risk assessments clearly identified people's needs and risks. They showed the action staff should take to minimise any risk of avoidable harm. For example, one person required support with their eating and drinking, their care plan contained clear information which was individual to them and provided staff with clear guidance on how to safely support the person.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. People’s care plans detailed important information which linked with current good practice on how to support them if they experienced feelings of distress. The care plans provided staff with guidance on recognising the person’s individual triggers and calming strategies. We reviewed people’s care records and interventions staff had made, these interventions evidenced staff had consistently followed the guidance in people’s care plans.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. The provider ensured systems were in place to ensure people’s health conditions and medicines were regularly reviewed by external professionals. Staff spoke positively about how they worked together to meet people's needs. One staff member told us, “We work together to create a safe and friendly environment” and a relative told us “They always tell me when [person] has been to the GP, I have no concerns.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives. Staff had supported people to develop health action plans; this is a plan which details a person’s individual health needs and the actions required to address them with the aim to improve their health outcomes. We found staff had made appropriate referrals to external agencies when this had been required to ensure people’s health and wellbeing needs were supported.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent. People’s care plans detailed the outcomes they required to ensure their needs were safely met. Relatives confirmed they were involved in their family members care planning and spoke positively about the achievements people had made since using the service. One relative told us, “This is the best home [person] has been in, I have no complaints they are very good with [person], everything has gone so well.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People had mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place when relevant. These had involved people who had the legal authority to do so on behalf of the person where appropriate. We reviewed mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions in place and found they had been completed in line with best practice, they contained details on how information had been provided and adapted to meet people’s their individual needs. Staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and were knowledgeable on how to support people in line with the act. We observed staff support people’s decisions throughout our inspection.