The Sandford 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

We have recommended that formal systems are put in place to ensure people and, where appropriate their relatives are fully involved in decisions about their wishes during their final days, for lifesaving treatment and following death. Staff worked with health and social care professionals to achieve good outcomes for people, however some professionals felt communications needed to improve. People’s communication needs were assessed and considered. People knew how to raise concerns and told us they would feel confident in doing so.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People received care and support which was personal to them and was tailored to meet their needs and preferences. One person told us, “I think the staff know me well and all my little ways.” Another person told us, “The staff know that I like to stay in my bedroom, and they check on me regularly to make sure I’m alright.”

Staff knew people well and what was important to them. A member of staff said, “The care plans tell us what we need to know about people, and we can spend time getting to know them.”

People chose where they spent their day and what they did, and staff were available to support people who needed assistance. People had their own bedrooms which they could personalise in accordance with their tastes and preferences.

People told us they saw healthcare professionals when needed. One person told us, “They [staff] will always call the doctor if I’m not well.” Another person said, “The staff come with me when I have my hospital appointments.”

Staff told us they did not experience any difficulties in obtaining support and visits from health and social care professionals when people needed.

We received mixed feedback from professionals who visited the home. Healthcare professionals felt that poor communication between staff meant that some recommendations made were not always implemented in a timely manner. Other professionals described communications as good, and they felt confident action would be taken to implement any recommendations made.

People’s care records showed they were seen by a range of professionals to meet their needs. These included doctors, opticians and mental health professionals.

Staff communicated with people and provided information in a format they understood. During lunch we observed a member of staff taking time to explain to a person they were assisting, what the meal was and what was on the fork.

Staff were aware of the Accessible Information Standards (AIS) and were mindful of people’s communication needs. The registered manager told us information could be produced in a range of formats where required.

People’s individual care plans detailed their communication needs. People’s records and information about them were stored and handled in accordance with General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).

People knew how to raise concerns when the need arose. One person said, “I don’t have any concerns, but I would complain if I needed to.” Another person told us, “No worries at the moment. I had to complain about my door not closing, but this has been fixed now.” A relative said, “I am very happy with everything. I would raise a complaint with the manager if I had any concerns.”

Staff told us they were confident the registered manager would respond and investigate any concerns which were brought to their attention.

There were regular meetings for people where their views were encouraged. People were able to make suggestions through annual satisfaction surveys. Complaints were investigated and responded to in accordance with the provider’s procedures.

People lived in an environment which had been suitably adapted to meet their needs. People had access to appropriate equipment to meet their needs and help to promote their independence such as mobility aids.

Staff understood when to seek medical attention, including emergency support for people. There was an on-call system in place where staff could seek additional support or guidance when needed.

Healthcare professionals from the local GP surgery visited the home every week to monitor and review people’s care and treatment. Referrals to other professionals were made where required.

Staff had received training about equality and diversity and human rights. There were procedures in place for staff to request additional support or advice when needed. People’s care plans detailed people’s needs and contacts for other professionals involved in their care.

People were treated as individuals, and all had access to the health care they needed.

Staff knew the importance of treating people as individuals and of ensuring they received the care and support they required whatever their needs or disabilities were.

Staff had received training about equality and diversity and human rights. The service had policies and processes in place to ensure people were treated equally and took action to ensure all people were provided with opportunities to give feedback about their care.

People could not always be confident that their needs and wishes during their final days and following death would be understood or respected by staff because their were no end of life care plans in place for staff to follow. However, the registered manager provided us with satisfaction surveys which had been completed by the relatives of people who had passed away and comments were positive about the care their loved one had received during their final days.

The registered manager told us staff had received training about supporting people at the end of their lives from a local hospice and four staff were currently undertaking advanced training through the Gold Standards Framework. This is a practical and evidence-based end of life care service improvement programme.

People’s care records did not include a plan of care detailing how people wanted to be supported during their final days and following death. Information about people’s preferred religion were not always recorded. Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Treatment and Care (ReSPECT) forms were in place which had been signed by the person’s GP however we were unable to see evidence that people or their representatives had been involved in the decision as to whether they wanted to be resuscitated or receive treatment in emergency situations.