Stoneleigh House

“We found people received personalised care which reflected their individual needs, preferences, goals and aspirations. However, we found some minor concerns in relation to medicines management, including one discrepancy in medicine stock counts and inconsistencies in recording up to date stock counts throughout medicine administration records checked. Protocols for as and when required (PRN) medicines did not always provide clear guidance on actions to take where medicines were administered over extended periods. There were no checks of sensor mats recorded. There were some missed opportunities to identify and respond to patterns and trends in accidents and incidents in a responsive timescale.”

“Overall though, care and support was planned, delivered and regularly reviewed in partnership with people and relevant professionals. Support was person-centred and promoted choice, control and independence in daily life. For example, people had access to a varied range of meal options to meet their preferences and dietary needs.”

“People told us they were supported to make choices about their daily routines, such as when people wished to get up and go to bed. People were encouraged to take part in activities within the local community. We observed meaningful interactions between staff and people, which supported wellbeing and social engagement.”

“We found there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff available to meet people’s needs.”

“The provider had previously been in breach of regulatory requirements relating to governance and the need to treat people with dignity and respect. At this assessment, we found sufficient improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.”