Archived: Sunny Lodge

Sunny Lodge is a residential care home for up to four people with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection four people were using the service. The service had spacious living areas and was set in a converted bungalow. The service was set in a residential area with easy access to the local community and had a large garden. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy

The service was safe. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection and to learn lessons from accidents and incidents. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people to meet their needs. The provider had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People were supported to eat and drink enough as to ensure they maintained a balanced diet and referrals to other health professionals were made when required. The environment was well maintained and suitable for the needs of people.

The service was caring. Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed choices.

The service was responsive. People were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The provider had systems in place to respond to complaints.

The service was well-led. The provider had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.

This is a small service and the registered provider also manages the service so it does not need to have a registered manager. As a registered provider, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were enough staff to support people safely and staff knew what to do if they suspected someone may be being abused or harmed. Recruitment practices were robust and contributed to protecting people from staff who were unsuitable to work in care. Medicines were managed and stored properly and safely so that people received them as the prescriber intended.

Staff had received the training they needed to understand how to meet people’s needs. They understood the importance of gaining consent from people before delivering their care or treatment. Staff were clear about their roles. Where people were not able to give informed consent staff and the manager ensured their rights were protected.

People have enough to eat and drink to meet their needs and staff supported them to make their own choices about what to have on the menu and to go shopping.

Staff treated people with warmth and compassion. They were respectful of people’s privacy and dignity and offered reassurance when people were distressed or unsettled. Staff also made sure that people who were becoming unwell were referred promptly to healthcare professionals for treatment and advice about their health and welfare.

Person centred care plans were in place and staff showed commitment to understanding and responding to each person’s needs and preferences so that they could engage meaningfully with people. Outings and outside entertainment was offered to people and staff supported people in their choice of activities on a daily basis.

Staff understood the importance of responding to and resolving concerns quickly if they were able to do so and ensured that more serious complaints were passed on to the manager. People’s relatives and those people using the service that were able to tell us, said that any complaints they made were addressed by the manager and staff.

The service had consistent leadership, most of the people who lived in the home had lived there a long time and the manager had developed a close relationship with both the people she cared for and their family members. The staff told us that the manager was supportive and easy to talk to. The provider/ manager was responsible for monitoring the quality and safety of the service and asked people for their views so that identified improvements could be made where possible.

They told us they enjoyed the range of activities provided and the annual holidays provided. One person told us, "I like living here because staff take me shopping and I feel happy.'

We saw several examples where staff supported and cared for people in a dignified and respectful way. We found that the service was meeting the personal, emotional and healthcare needs of people who used the service.

We found that the system in place for recruiting new staff was effective, robust and provided the service with the appropriate skill mix to care for the people they supported.

Two staff told us that they found the manager was responsive to the needs of the people who used the service and the staff team. One person told us that 'The manager is always here and is very approachable.'

Staff we spoke to told us that they received regular supervision, one person said "The manager was approachable and very supportive." We saw that staff received regular supervision, training and support.

People's needs were assessed and peoples likes and dislikes were identified and recorded. One person who used the service said "Staff here are nice they treat me nicely, staff help me." Another person told us "The manager is nice I like living here."

We saw the provider regularly assesses and monitors the quality of the service provided to protect people who used the service from the risk of inappropriate or unsafe care and treatment. Monthly audits are carried out reviewing the quality of the service provided and the condition of the environment.

Any areas for improvement are identified and the appropriate action to address any concerns and identify areas of good practice. We saw the providers business plan for 2013, it clearly identified that the following actions were planned: communal areas of the home for redecoration, replacing curtains, nets and bedding and the reviewing of policies and procedures.