Chandlers Ford Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We assessed 1 quality statement from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question has remained the same. Feedback the provider received about care provided to loved ones was positive. Staff spoke confidently and compassionately about how they supported people with end-of-life care. Where records were not always of a consistent quality, the provider demonstrated how this was being addressed through the services transition to electronic care plans.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The regional senior nurse said they were on site regularly to support the manager and the nursing team. They discussed a range of audits they carried out including care plans and medication. They were also responsible for the training and development of nurses, including supervisions. We were told about regular clinical and review meetings that the service held. The manager told us they did a daily walk round the service and monitored documentation. They said, "I want to make sure documentation is perfect. I've put checks in so that things are checked every day." We saw these during the assessment. Most staff we spoke with felt that the manager was approachable. Staff felt that they could give feedback on ways the service could be improved. Some staff commented on a suggestions box which they use to put feedback or suggestions in anonymously, staff told us they liked this approach. Staff told us meetings were held once a month and they felt that they were productive, and they could voice concerns or feedback. Staff told us they felt communication in the home was good. One staff commented, “We have the flash meetings every day. [the manager] is very approachable, and her door is always open. She does a walk round every morning and speaks to everyone, always says come and speak to me if you need anything."

We identified some shortfalls in the providers quality and assurance systems. For example, the medicines audit undertaken in May 2024 by the provider did not identify the concerns we found at this assessment in relation to people’s medicines administration and records. Where they undertook diabetes audits which monitored compliance against a range of requirements and best practice, we found the scope was not robust. Audits did not review the delivery of people’s blood monitoring and recording to ensure this was undertaken in line with people's care plans. Records related to people’s care were not always consistent. The quality and completeness of people’s care records varied. Some aspects of people’s care planning were robust and detailed to ensure staff knew how they should meet people’s care needs, however this was not consistent. We found several examples where records related to people's care were not up to date or robust. The provider told us all records were being reviewed as they transitioned to a new electronic care planning system. However, we found this migration was still underway and required time to be embedded to ensure all records related to people’s care was complete and contemporaneous to reflect the care they received. Although systems and processes had not identified the shortfalls we found at this assessment in relation to medicines and care records, some audits did demonstrate that the provider regularly reviewed and identified of areas where standards and internal compliance had not met their own expectations or policy. Where they identified improvements were required, we saw action points were raised, there was delegated oversight among leaders and shortfalls had been communicated with staff to address this.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.