CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sandhurst Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and outbreak planning. They did find some masks were not being worn correctly and advised on laundry storage.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Sandhurst Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control overall, with some mask-wearing and laundry issues.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 19 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than reviewing every area of care.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements for visitors, testing, vaccinations, protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and managing outbreaks. Staff had infection control training and there were supplies and stations for putting on and removing protective equipment.
Inspectors saw some staff wearing masks incorrectly. They also advised improvements to how clean laundry was stored. The home later provided evidence that lidded boxes had been bought. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to declare their health status, provide contact details, take a rapid test and have their temperature checked. Visits from one designated family member or friend were supported with testing.
“All visitors were only allowed into the home once they had declared their health status, provided their contact details, completed a rapid COVID-19 test and had their temperature checked.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff knew which protective equipment to use. The home had several stations with instructions and reported plentiful supplies.
“Staff were aware of the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) they needed to wear to keep people and themselves safe.” from the report
Cleaning and outbreak planning
The home was clean and had records showing regular cleaning of frequently touched areas. There was also a plan for managing an outbreak.
“The home was clean and there were cleaning schedules to show that high touch points were being cleaned on a regular basis to help keep people safe.” from the report
Keeping people connected
Staff helped people keep in touch with family by video and telephone calls when visits were restricted.
“Staff help me call my family when I ask.” from the report
Some incorrect mask use
needs fixingInspectors saw one or two staff members wearing masks incorrectly. They also saw a staff member eat with a mask around their neck and put it back without changing it. Further training was promised.
“However, we did observe one or two staff members not wearing masks appropriately” from the report
Laundry storage
minorInspectors advised the home about infection control in the laundry. The home later sent evidence that lidded boxes had been bought for clean laundry.
“We advised on infection control within the laundry and following the inspection, the registered manager sent us evidence of lidded boxes being purchased for clean laundry.” from the report
- 01What further PPE training was put in place after inspectors saw some staff wearing masks incorrectly?
- 02Are the lidded boxes for clean laundry now in use, and how is laundry infection control checked?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested, and what happens if there is a suspected outbreak?
- 04How are visits currently managed, including testing and checks for visitors?
- 05Has the extra cleaner been employed to provide cleaning cover across all seven days?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess the other quality areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 April 2021 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.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Sandhurst Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and clear improvements, but some medicines and privacy records still needed attention.
Inspectors visited on 20 and 25 June 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, accident and complaint records, audits and other quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People described staff as caring, respectful and available. Inspectors found good support with food, health needs, personal care, communication and daily choices.
The home had improved since its previous Requires Improvement rating in June 2018. The provider was no longer in breach of regulations. Inspectors still recommended further improvements to some medicines records and noted a few smaller issues with privacy, equipment and the condition of parts of the building.
Kind relationships
People spoke positively about staff and said they felt relaxed, respected and supported. Inspectors saw staff maintaining dignity and encouraging friendships.
“People said they did not feel judged by staff; people were relaxed and at ease.” from the report
Safe staffing
People described a consistent staff team who knew them well. Recruitment checks were completed before new staff started.
“People benefited from a conscientious staff team who knew them well and could meet their current care needs.” from the report
Food and hydration
Care plans recorded people's dietary needs and preferences. People praised the food and were offered drinks throughout the day.
“People's nutritional needs were met. Care plans held information about their dietary needs, including likes and dislikes.” from the report
Improved oversight
The home had introduced clearer roles, regular audits and unannounced checks. These changes helped the management team identify and address issues.
“Since the last inspection, there had been a number of improvements, including the quality of monitoring the service through regular audits, observations of staff practice and supervisions.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingSome handwritten medicine charts had not been checked and signed by two trained staff. Allergy information was not always up to date, and there was initially no system to record where medicine patches were applied.
“Some medicines charts were handwritten. These had not always been signed by two members of trained staff to show that they had been checked for accuracy.” from the report
Privacy of conversations
needs fixingStaff sometimes forgot that conversations in the kitchen could be heard from the dining room. The manager said staff would be reminded about confidentiality.
“However, staff sometimes forgot their conversations in the kitchen could be overheard in the dining room, which potentially compromised people's privacy.” from the report
Admission assessments
seriousThe home had previously admitted someone whose mental health needs it could not meet. Management recognised that the assessment before admission had not been adequate and said the process would change.
“In retrospect the registered manager recognised their assessment process on this occasion had not been adequate.” from the report
Worn areas and equipment
minorOne bath seat was worn and could affect infection control. A communal bathroom also had tired flooring and decoration. Management said these issues would be addressed.
“The surface of one bath seat had been become worn which could compromise infection control measures.” from the report
- 01How are handwritten medicine charts checked and signed, and how do you keep allergy details up to date?
- 02How do you record the position of medicine patches and check that sites are rotated safely?
- 03What steps have you taken to stop private conversations being overheard in shared areas?
- 04How do you assess a person's mental health needs before agreeing that the home can meet them?
- 05Have the worn bath seat and tired communal bathroom now been repaired or refurbished?
This was a scheduled follow-up inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; it checked improvements after the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 July 2019 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.
Every inspection of Sandhurst Residential Home
3 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2018InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 March 2016.
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.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.