Summerfield Rest Home

“Staff understood safeguarding and people felt protected. Risk management was mostly effective and actions were taken quickly when gaps were found. The building needed repairs which impacted infection control risks and décor but improvements were underway. Staffing levels were safe and recruitment processes were robust. Staff received training, supervision and support. Medicines were managed well with clear procedures.”

“ ”

“People’s needs were fully assessed and care followed recognised guidance. Staff worked well with each other and external professionals. People were supported to maintain good health, eat well and stay active. Reviews helped track outcomes and make improvements. Consent and mental capacity decisions were recorded clearly.”

“ ”

“People were treated with kindness, respect and understanding. Care was personalised and supported choice, independence and involvement in meaningful activities. Staff responded promptly to immediate needs and communicated well with relatives. Staff felt supported and valued. Care was person centred and flexible. Information was shared in ways people could understand. The provider sought feedback and acted on it. People accessed local services and the service adapted when barriers appeared. Support for life changes and end of life wishes was sensitive and planned.”

“ ”

“Leadership was strong, open and inclusive. The registered manager promoted clear values and staff understood these. People and staff felt able to speak up. Equality and diversity were promoted in the workforce. Governance systems were effective and improvement plans were active. Partnerships with the community and professionals supported good outcomes. Continuous learning and innovation helped develop practice and improve the environment.”