Sandwood Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Lessons were learnt when things went wrong. People were supported to move into Sandwood safely and had their ongoing needs assessed to ensure they received safe care and treatment. Environmental safety risks to people were managed well. The home was clean and tidy. Infection prevention and control measures in place protected people from the risk of infection.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they felt safe living at Sandwood. A person we spoke with told us, “I feel safe as I have my call bell and there are always staff around.” When people reported an issue with their call bell, staff acted quickly to ensure people’s safety. This meant feedback was acted upon in timely manner to ensure people remained safe.

Staff told us they felt confident in raising issues with both the registered manager and deputy manager. Staff spoke highly of the learning environment the registered manager had implemented and felt the management team communicated well with the wider staff team to ensure lessons were learnt. Regular supervisions and team meetings provided staff with an opportunity to discuss and learn from any incidents at the service. Staff told us they were trained well and were encouraged to complete further training to strengthen their knowledge. This meant people received safe, good quality care.

Processes in place meant lessons were learnt when things went wrong. Frequent analysis of accidents and incidents was completed to review trends and themes. This ensured lessons were learnt and the risk of reoccurrence reduced. Lessons learnt were shared with staff during staff meetings and supervisions. For example, a monthly summary of incidents were compiled and sent to the staff team to ensure they understood current risks. The summary detailed what happened and what action was taken. This reduced the risk of reoccurrence. There was a complaints policy in place which was accessible to people, their representatives and staff. Complaints were responded to in a timely manner.

People told us staff supported them to seek help and support from other health and social care professionals when needed. A relative we spoke with told us, they felt well supported when their relative moved into the home, they said a full assessment of their relatives’ needs was completed to ensure staff could support them safely.

Staff knew people’s needs well which meant they had sound knowledge of the health and social care professionals involved in people’s care. Staff gave us examples of visiting professionals such as the dementia outreach team and dietitians, they told us of the advice and support they provided and how they implemented this into people’s care plans.

Partners told us staff referred people to services appropriate. A professional we spoke with told us staff communicated well to ensure people received the right care and treatment.

Systems in place ensured people were supported safely when they first moved into Sandwood and on an ongoing basis. Records we reviewed demonstrated the service assessed people prior to them moving into Sandwood. Care was reviewed regularly to ensure the care and support provided was aligned to the persons needs and expectations. Where people required external health and social care support, documentation showed that suitable referrals had been made. For example, a person was visited by a community nurse and a dietitian, their visits had been clearly documented to ensure staff had access to the advice provided. This meant people received the care and support required.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us the environment at Sandwood made them feel safe. People told us they had access to call bells to call for staff when needed. People told us staff supported them to gain access to any equipment they needed to increase the safety of their environment. For example, a person we spoke with told us, staff arranged for a shower chair to be delivered so they could shower safely.

Staff knew how to monitor the safety of the environment, and where to report any maintenance concerns too. Staff told us, they logged maintenance issues and felt confident maintenance staff actioned these in a timely manner. The registered manager had a system to monitor ongoing maintenance of the home, they told us the provider was supportive and any issues with maintenance of the home were resolved quickly. The deputy manager completed a daily walk round to identify any environmental concerns. This meant timely action was taken to keep people safe. Staff knew how to respond in the event of an emergency evacuation. For example, if a fire alarm sounded, staff could explain how people would be supported to move into a safe space.

Some people living at Sandwood required equipment such as a hoist to ensure they could move from one space to another safely. We observed staff to use equipment safely. Equipment was stored safely to ensure they were not hazardous when not in use. The home was safe in the event of an emergency such as a fire. Fire safety equipment was placed throughout the home to ensure staff had easy access to it. Fire doors in place worked effectively. This meant people would be protected in the event of a fire. Window restrictors were in place. This safety feature prevents people from falling or climbing out. Restrictors in place were in line with health and safety guidance.

The environment was kept safe, by regular checks and maintenance. We saw there had been regular checks to ensure the home was safe in the event of an emergency. For example, checks of the emergency lighting system were completed and weekly fire alarm tests carried out. Systems were in place to ensure the water quality was maintained to reduce the risk of water-borne bacteria such as legionella. The gas heating and electrical system were regularly serviced by qualified professionals to prevent harm to people.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People and their relatives told us the home was clean and tidy. A relative we spoke with said, “The home is clean and well maintained and our [relative’s] room is very comfortable.”

Staff told us they received training in infection prevention and control and applied this training in their practice. Staff knew what personal protective equipment they should wear and when. Housekeeping staff were knowledgeable on what cleaning products to use to ensure areas were cleaned effectively. The registered manager completed observational supervisions to ensure staff worked safely, this included practical hand hygiene training. This helped to protect people from the spread of infections.

The home was clean and hygienic. We observed staff using personal protective equipment such as gloves and aprons safely. People’s bedrooms and communal lounges were clean and well maintained. We observed housekeeping staff complete their duties diligently. We found specialist pressure relieving mattresses and cushions were clean and undamaged. We found the kitchen to be clean and tidy.

Processes in place meant people were protected from the spread of transmissible infections. Cleaning records and audits in place demonstrated Sandwood was monitored, and any action needed was taken in a timely manner. Staff completed training in infection control, how to put on personal protective equipment and how to keep people safe in the event of an infection outbreak. Staff had ongoing practical supervisions to ensure their training remained effective.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.