You are here

Sharnbrook Care Home Limited Good Also known as Sharnbrook Lodge

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11 April 2013
Date of Publication: 8 May 2013
Inspection Report published 8 May 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 11 April 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

Our inspection of 06 June 2012 found people did not always experience appropriate care and support because the delivery of care did not promote people’s welfare and well-being by taking into account their individual mental, social and emotional needs.

We visited the home on 11 April 2013 and observed the support provided to people in one of the lounges during the midday meal. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We observed positive engagements between staff and people.

Staff provided people with choices that enabled them to maintain their independence. For example, we saw staff provided people with clothes protector. This prevented clothing becoming stained from food spillages. We observed staff supported people to maintain their independence. People were enabled to eat independently and staff offered support by prompting and assistance only when required. This meant people’s independence was promoted.

We saw staff provided people with choices for dessert. For example, people were asked if they wished to have banana and custard or yoghurt. Staff showed people the choices that were on offer and they chose what they wished to eat. We observed staff offered people cold drinks. One person requested a hot drink and their request was granted. This meant people’s wishes were respected and met.

We observed staff addressed people by their preferred names. When helping people who needed assistance with hoisting, we saw this was carried out in a dignified manner to ensure people were not exposed. We heard staff explaining the activity to the person and what would happen next. This ensured people’s dignity was maintained.

People’s diversity, values and human rights were respected.

In the three care plan records we looked at there was information on people’s religion, aids they required for daily living and their preferred routines. People’s likes and dislikes were also recorded. This information helped staff to provide care which was sensitive to people’s needs and wishes.

The staff we spoke with were able to describe how people’s views were listened to and acted upon. An example given was one person requested egg and bacon for lunch and their request was granted. Other upheld examples provided were, people’s wishes on when they wished to rise and retire.

Two people who used the service said they were provided with choices. One person said, “We are able to do anything we wish to do.” Another person said, “Staff always maintain my privacy. They make sure I am covered with a towel when washing me.”

A family member of a person who used the service said that the staff involved them in their relative’s care and support. The person said, “I think my… is treated with respect.”