Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Sandhurst Court

Goodpublished 7 February 2023, 3 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were protected from abuse and risks were identified and managed. Medicines, infection control, recruitment and accident reporting were also found to be managed safely, although some care plans lacked enough detail.
Effective?
Good
People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff had suitable training and support. The home worked with health professionals and supported people's dietary, healthcare and communication needs.
Caring?
Good
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to express their views, make decisions and build independence through meaningful goals.
Responsive?
Good
Care was person-centred and staff knew people's preferences and communication needs. People were supported to take part in activities, maintain relationships and use community facilities.
Well-led?
Good
The manager and staff understood their responsibilities and the home had quality checks in place. Relatives and staff described the manager and staff team as approachable, and people and relatives were involved in the service.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2023

Rated Good at its first inspection; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some care plans needing more detail.

This was the first inspection since the home registered in 2021. It was unannounced and took place over three visits in December 2022. Inspectors spoke with one person, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files and other service records.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, received appropriate care and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.

The home supported people to make choices, develop skills and take part in activities in the community. Staff knew people well, used communication tools and worked with health professionals. The home was clean, well maintained and had suitable sensory facilities.

Inspectors found some care plans did not contain enough detail about how people should be supported. The registered manager said an action plan was in place to improve them. Evening staffing levels were also questioned, and the manager acted immediately to provide extra support.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind, respectful care

    Staff were observed providing compassionate care. Relatives also said staff were caring.

    “People received their care with kindness and respect from staff, which demonstrated the values of right support, right care and right culture.” from the report
  • Choice and independence

    People were supported to make decisions, follow their interests and develop practical skills. Staff encouraged people to do what they could for themselves.

    “People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way.” from the report
  • Good communication

    The home used easy-read information and communication tools. Staff understood how different people communicated.

    “Communication tools were used to communicate with people. Staff knew people's communication needs well.” from the report
  • Community involvement

    People took part in activities they enjoyed and were supported to attend events and maintain relationships in the wider community.

    “People were supported to take part in activities which they enjoyed.” from the report
  • Health support

    Staff helped people attend appointments and worked with health and social care professionals. A nurse practitioner carried out regular reviews.

    “The service worked closely with health and social care professionals to review and make changes to a person's support when appropriate.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Care plan detail

    needs fixing

    Some care plans did not explain clearly enough how people should be supported. The manager said an action plan was in place to address this.

    “Some of the care plans lacked sufficient detail about how people should be supported.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What extra detail has been added to people's care plans since the inspection?
  2. 02How do you decide how many staff are needed in the evenings?
  3. 03What happens if someone needs extra support during an evening activity or outing?
  4. 04How are communication tools and easy-read information kept up to date for each person?
  5. 05How will the home complete the section of the support plan covering end of life care?

This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; no previous ratings were available. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 February 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Sandhurst Court

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. February 2023Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Sandhurst Court →

  2. March 2021

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 March 2021.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kirklees

These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.

Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 86 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
Claire A., about Carla M.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
Marion L., about Primrose N.
See live-in carers near KirkleesProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.