• Care Home
  • Care home

Sid Bailey Care Home

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

Knollbeck Lane, Brampton, Barnsley, S73 0TX (01226) 812229

Provided and run by:
Danforth Care Brampton Limited

Important:

This care home is run by two companies: Danforth Care Brampton Limited and Care UK Care Services Limited. These two companies have a dual registration and are jointly responsible for the services at the home.

Assessment report published 11 July 2025

On this page

Effective

Good

3 June 2025

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

Assessing needs

Score: 3

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Prior to people moving to the home, a pre-assessment was carried out to ensure the service was able to meet people’s needs effectively and to check the service had access to any relevant equipment required to support people. Care plans were reviewed regularly to ensure any changes were clearly documented. People and relatives commented positively on the referral process. One relative said, “The referral process was easy, the home did everything and got everything in place, I had no worries about the home settling [family member] in.”

Delivering evidence-based care and treatment

Score: 4

The provider always 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. They worked to develop evidence-based good practice and standards. Staff and leaders promoted excellent nutrition and hydration and had thought of innovative ways to increase food and fluid intake. The staff made hydration part of the day. For example, the home provided a happy hour, every day, where drinks such as mocktails, smoothies and milkshakes were provided, along with a wide range of snacks. People were given opportunities to eat a varied diet which met their needs. Pop-up restaurants were a popular event and themed around what people wanted to eat. For example, the home had a pop-up pizza restaurant where people ordered freshly baked pizzas, which were prepared on site and presented in a restaurant style. These innovative ways to improve food and fluid intake had improved people’s health and well-being.

How staff, teams and services work together

Score: 3

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. Staff worked well together as a team and with other professionals to ensure people received appropriate support. Hospital passports were available to ensure people had appropriate information when they were admitted to hospital. One relative said, “When [family member] went in hospital, the carer rang me to say [family member] had fallen and was going to hospital. I was away at the time on holiday. The home send [family member’s] medical information to the hospital.” Staff meetings took place and relevant issues about the home were discussed. Staff found the meetings valuable. Daily meetings also took place to ensure the team addressed daily issues and knew the plan for the day.

 

Supporting people to live healthier lives

Score: 3

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People had good access to healthcare professionals and people were supported to develop skills which improved their outcomes. For example, a local dance group visited the home to regularly to do exercises with people. Another person visited to carry out strengthening exercises with people. These sessions had a positive impact on people’s ability to remain active and improve movement. People and relatives felt staff ensured people were supported to live healthier lives. One relative said, “Because of [family member’s] weight loss they [staff] have given them fortified drinks. They are aware that [family member’s] dementia has progressed very quickly, and is finding it difficult to swallow, so the speech and language therapy [SALT] team have been asked to assess [family member].”

Monitoring and improving outcomes

Score: 3

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. One person was reserved and quiet when they moved into the home. The dedicated staff had been instrumental in encouraging the person’s growth, engaging them in various activities that had boosted their confidence and rekindled their enjoyment of socialising. The registered manager said, “Nowadays, [person’s name] is often seen sharing jokes and engaging in group activities with newfound friends. [Person’s] bright smile and infectious laughter light up the room, bringing joy to fellow residents and caregivers alike.” The team looked for opportunities to enrich people’s lives, ensuring that they experience growth, happiness, and a genuine sense of belonging.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People were involved in their care and support and staff sought their consent prior to completing tasks. Staff and leaders were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been applied for as necessary. Staff knew the best way to present choices to people to maximise their involvement.