You are here

Sandown Park Care Home Outstanding

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 4 March 2018

Our inspection took place on 9 January and 10 January 2017 and was unannounced.

Sandown Park Care Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. We regulate both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Sandown Park Care Home can accommodate 95 people across three floors, each of which has separate adapted facilities. The service cares for adults, including people living with dementia. The premises are modern and purpose-built. People live in their own bedrooms and have access to communal facilities such as a dining, lounge and activities areas. There is an expansive landscaped sensory garden surrounding the building. At the time of our inspection, there were 84 people living at the service.

The provider is required to have a registered manager as part of their conditions of registration. 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 in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. At the time of our inspection, there was a registered manager in post.

The risk of harm to people was significantly reduced by the systems and processes in place at the service. This included prevention of harm by abuse, neglect, discrimination, injuries and accidents. People’s care documentation and the support they received ensured their maximum safety. When harm occurred, this was swiftly acted on and the service used any incident as a point for reflection and to put strategies in place to prevent similar events in the future. There was a safe amount of staff deployed and robust recruitment processes. People were protected from the risk of infections. The service was clean and well-maintained. The management of people’s medicines was robust.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and associated codes of practice. People were assisted to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practise.

Staff induction, training, supervision and performance appraisals were extensive and ensured workers had the necessary knowledge and skills to effectively support people. People’s care preferences, likes and dislikes were assessed, recorded and respected. We found there was appropriate access to other community healthcare professionals. People were supported to maintain a very healthy lifestyle. People complimented the food and drink and we found the risks of malnutrition and dehydration were satisfactorily managed.

The service remained very caring. There was overwhelming complimentary feedback from people who used the service, their family and community healthcare professionals. People told us they were able to participate in care planning and reviews and we saw evidence of decision-making that promoted people’s independence. People’s privacy and dignity was respected when care was provided to them. We observed respectful care by staff.

The service continued to provide outstanding person-centred care. Care plans were thorough and contained information of how to support people in the best possible way. We saw there was complaints system in place which included the ability for people to contact any staff member or the management team. Questionnaires were used to determine people’s satisfaction with the care. People and their families had a say in the everyday decision-making and operation of the service.

The service was run by a committed management duo and care was provided by a passionate, effective team of staff. There were numerous positive opinions about the management and leadership of the service. The

Inspection areas



Updated 4 March 2018

The service was safe.

Effective systems were in place to protect people from the risks of abuse or neglect.

Appropriate risk assessments about people�s care were completed and regularly reviewed.

There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people�s needs, although people expressed there should be better continuity.

People�s medicines were safely managed.

Lessons were learned and improvements made when incidents occurred.



Updated 4 March 2018

The service was effective.

People�s likes, preferences and routines were considered and used during the provision of care. People and relatives were actively involved in their care.

There was good staff support, with extensive staff induction, training, supervision and performance reviews.

People�s nutritional and hydration needs were met and risks of malnutrition or dehydration were proactively managed.

The service was compliant with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were assisted to make informed decisions or decisions were made in their best interests.

The premises and decoration were specially adapted for people living with dementia.

The service worked well with other community healthcare professionals.



Updated 4 March 2018

The service remains outstanding.



Updated 4 March 2018

The service remains outstanding.



Updated 4 March 2018

The service was well-led.

People and relatives described a strong, visible leadership presence.

Research and innovation was used to continuously improve people�s care experiences.

Best practise knowledge and experience was embedded in people�s support and shared within the wider adult social care landscape.

Effective partnerships with local community partners ensured enriched experiences of care for people.

Quality and safety were continuously at the forefront of the care people received.