CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sandylee House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- There were shortfalls in staffing for spontaneous activities, staff knowledge about reporting safeguarding concerns, and keeping risk assessments up to date. Medicines, infection control and recruitment checks were satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans gave staff clear guidance. Staff were trained, people received suitable food and health professionals were involved when needed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were supported by kind staff who knew them well. Their privacy, dignity, choices and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and communication needs. People had activities and family contact, although access to activities outside the home was sometimes limited by staffing.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management team. Audits, feedback and reviews were used to identify improvements, including recruitment and updating records.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but safety needs improvement because staffing and safeguarding knowledge were not always strong enough.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home. Inspectors visited on 25 January 2023, spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care, medicines and management records. The inspection followed concerns about care, but inspectors found no evidence that people were harmed by those concerns.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. People were treated kindly, involved in decisions, supported with their health needs and helped to take part in activities.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Staff could meet people's personal care needs, but there were not always enough staff for spontaneous outings or activities. Some staff did not know they could report safeguarding concerns directly to the local authority, and one changed risk had not been added to a risk assessment.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff were kind, knew people well and respected their privacy and dignity.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew them well.” from the report
Personalised support
People were involved in their care and were offered choices about daily life, meals, clothing and activities.
“People had personalised care plans which reflected their preferences.” from the report
Good health support
The home worked with health professionals and acted when people's health needs changed.
“People had access to a range of health professionals where they needed them.” from the report
Open management
The management team sought feedback and used audits to identify areas needing improvement.
“The management team completed audits across the home to identify where improvements were required and ensure action was taken to make these improvements.” from the report
Staffing could limit activities
needs fixingThere were enough staff for personal care, but not always enough to support people to go out or make spontaneous choices about their day.
“Whilst there were enough staff to meet people's personal care needs, staff told us there were not always enough staff to support people to make spontaneous decisions around how they spend their day.” from the report
Safeguarding knowledge
needs fixingNot all staff knew that concerns could be reported directly to the local authority safeguarding team. Inspectors recommended reviewing staff understanding and training.
“However, not all staff were aware they could report concerns directly to the Local Authority safeguarding team.” from the report
Risk records were not always updated
seriousA changed risk had not been recorded in a person's risk assessment. The manager put this document in place after the inspection, but agency staff might not have known about the risk.
“Where people's needs had changed, this had not always been reflected in their risk assessments.” from the report
- 01How many regular staff are now available on each shift, and can people go out when they choose?
- 02How do you make sure agency staff understand each person's current risks and support plans?
- 03What safeguarding training have staff completed since the inspection, and can all staff explain how to report a concern to the local authority?
- 04Has the risk assessment for people whose needs have changed been reviewed and shared with all staff?
- 05What progress has been made with recruiting more regular staff?
This was the first inspection of the newly registered home and covered all five CQC questions; the previous provider's Good rating was published on 3 April 2020. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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.
Every inspection of Sandylee House
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 July 2020.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.