Archived: Sandrock Nursing 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 the service met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this service under new provider. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 50 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. They did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. The provider did not always have clear plans in place around people’s person-centred goals, aims and aspirations. Although we observed care plans written by the staff emphasising people’s strengths, interests and differences we found the provider was not completing any reviews of people care plans and the provider demonstrated a lack of interest in the people at Sandrock Nursing Home.

The provider did not understand the diverse health and care needs of people at Sandrock Nursing Home. The provider neglected the premises, and this did not facilitate positive risk taking because people could not use the facilities as intended.However, staff demonstrated they understood the health and care needs of people and their local communities, so overall the care was joined up and supported choice and continuity. Staff made sure people had access to health services to ensure and maintain good health and continuity of care. Care plans evidenced input from health professionals, such as GP’s and Speech and Language Therapy Team (SALT).

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The provider could not demonstrate how they were communicating with people in an accessible and person-centred manner. However, staff ensured food options were written on a board in the dining room and the menu was displayed so people knew what they were expecting for their meal.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Regular residents’ meetings were held where people could give their views on the service and the care they received. In addition, the provider had a survey where people, visitors and staff could leave their feedback. Staff commented they were included regarding feedback and suggestions for improvements to enhanced people's quality of life.

The provider did not always make sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The environment was not accessible to all people including those with physical or sensory impairments. Staff did ensure people were able to access medical assistance in an emergency by calling the doctor or calling for an ambulance. Some equipment was in place to alert staff if a person fell or protect them from physical injury.

The provider did not always actively listen to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. Due to shortfalls we found in relation to premises and environment, and the lack of provider oversight, care was inconsistent for people who lived at Sandrock Nursing Home. Whilst we found staff supported people to achieve outcomes there was a lack of detail in people’s care records, about their future goals and wishes.

People were not always supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. There was a lack of records relating to people’s future wishes, goals and aspirations. The environment and layout of the premises did not make it suitable for the people living at the service. However, we did see information relating to people’s wishes at the end of their life were discussed with people and relatives, where appropriate and this information was contained in people’s care plans.