We carried out a review of the data available to us about Sambrook House Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Sambrook House Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service: We found staff were knowledgeable about the support needs of people in their care. We observed staff providing support to people throughout our inspection visit. We saw that staff were very thoughtful in their approach to people. They knew them well and what they needed and liked.
People we spoke with gave positive feedback about the home and the staff who worked in it. They told us that the staff supported people well. We saw that warm, positive relationships with people were apparent and one person described the staff as “Marvellous, all of them and the manager. She is fantastic and gets the job done.”
Care plans were clearly recorded. They detailed how people wished and needed to be cared for. They were regularly reviewed and updated as required. We saw that relatives were involved in supporting staff to understand how people wished to be cared for. Relatives were consulted with and played an important part in the running of the home.
The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.
The food served at the home was of a very high standard. The home had won awards for the quality of the food; The Shropshire Partners in Care Healthy Eating Award in 2014 and 2016. Everyone we spoke with told us that they enjoyed the food and we saw that it was plentiful and good quality and people could choose what they wanted to eat.
There were many social activities provided at the home and people told us that they enjoyed them. These were provided by a small team of volunteers from the local village who had connections with the home.
The registered manager and the provider used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. They had a positive working relationship that was apparent during the inspection. They completed regular audits of the service and held staff meetings to seek the views of staff about the service. They also regularly spoke with the people who lived in the home and to relatives.
More information is in the detailed findings below.
Rating at last inspection: The service was rated Good at the last inspection in June 2016.
Why we inspected: We inspected the service in accordance with our ratings programme.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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. The registered manager received support from a staff team, which included senior care workers, care workers, housekeeper, domestic staff, and a chef.
People received effective support from sufficient numbers of staff. Employment of staff only took place following pre-employment checks and all received comprehensive training. Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of harm and how to report concerns. People had their prescribed medicines administered safely. Staff understood how to manage risks to people and made sure they were safe.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. We found there were formal systems in place to assess people's capacity for decision making and applications had been made to the authorising agencies for people who needed these safeguards. Staff respected people’s choices and were aware of the key legal requirements of the MCA and DoLS.
People received support from staff who had received training in how to meet their needs. Staff had the skills they needed to provide support in an effective way. People had enough food and drinks and were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet. Staff made sure mealtimes were relaxed and enjoyable for people. Access to health care professionals was readily available to people and they were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing.
Positive relationships were encouraged between people living at the home and the staff. People received their care and support from staff who were kind and showed them respect. People were able to be involved in planning their care and support and were encouraged to be independent. People had their privacy and respected by the staff team.
People received care and support, which was personalised and responded to their individual needs. Care records gave staff guidance on how to provide care in a consistent way. Plans were reviewed regularly and staff were up to date on what people’s needs were and how to meet them. There was a range of activities for people to take part in and people had the choice of how they spent their time.
People were encouraged to provide their feedback about the service using formal meetings and surveys as well as informally through talking with the registered manager and staff. People understood how to make a complaint and felt the registered manager would address their complaints.
People’s views about the service were used to drive improvements. The service had an open culture, which allowed people to share ideas about how to improve the service. The registered manager had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and understood the role of the registered manager. The registered manager supported staff to understand their roles and ensure they had the skills to support people. The service had won a number of awards earlier in the year from the Shropshire partners in care
People were all complimentary about staff and the service they received. Comments included, "This is the best move I ever made coming here. Staff couldn't be nicer or more helpful." A visitor told us "I am 100% happy with the care here. The staff are very good."
People were encouraged to make everyday decisions. Where they were unable to make more complex decisions the provider followed legal procedures.
Care records contained detailed information about people's needs. Staff knew how they wished to be supported. Health care needs had been met. Relatives told us that they were involved and kept informed of any changes in people's health or personal care needs.
There was a safe system of medication in place. People had received their medicines safely and as prescribed.
Staff had undertaken extensive training. Supervision and support was available to them. Staff told us they felt confident in providing support and care for people.
The complaints procedure was readily available to people who used the service and their representatives. The service had responded well to complaints raised.
People were also very complimentary about the staff. They told us that the staff were, 'Wonderful', 'Excellent', and that they had, 'Great patience'.
The staff described the home as, 'A nice place to work' and said that it had, 'A nice atmosphere'.
We found that people had lots of opportunities to express their views, either through the 'residents' committee' or on an individual basis. We saw evidence that people's views were listened to and acted upon.
People told us that they felt safe in the home. We found that there was a comprehensive safeguarding policy in place and that staff were familiar with it.
We found that care plans were comprehensive and up to date. Staff told us that they gave them all the information they needed to provide consistently good care.
The home had suitable arrangements in place to monitor the quality of the service it provided.
People told us that they liked their rooms, had good care, excellent food and had enough activities to take part in if they wished. We saw that staff spoke with people politely and respected their right to make choices about how they spent their time and received care and support.
A relative spoken with was very satisfied with the standard of care provided and how they were kept informed by the home about their relatives care.
People had good access to health care. A health professional told us that their timely involvement was appropriately sought, and that staff followed their instructions and guidance.
Although there were some record keeping omissions, staff we spoke with were clear about people's current care needs, which were met to everyone's satisfaction. Everyone spoken with felt able to raise a request, concern or complaint with the senior on duty or the manager. They had confidence this would be taken seriously and acted upon.
All care staff had completed training about how to safeguard people in their care. Staff spoken with were clear about how to report and respond should a concern arise, and about the homes policies and procedures to keep people safe. The staff said that at times that they felt more staff were needed. This was so that they could spend more quality time with people they support.
Health and safety systems were in place to make sure that people who live and work at the home were kept safe.