Archived: Sunnymeade Quality Care Home

We saw people's privacy and dignity were respected at all times. We saw and heard that staff spoke to people in a way that demonstrated respect for the people they cared for. One visiting health care professional said, 'When I visit I can be 100% sure that the staff know the full details of the person I have come to see'. One person who used the service said, 'This is my home- they check on me all the time, which I'm pleased about'.

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask;

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the people who received care at the home and people were able to say they felt safe living at Sunnymeade. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had completed training and understood how to safeguard the people they supported from abuse.

Staff training records contained all mandatory courses as required. For example staff had completed training in health and safety and Dementia care. This meant the provider could demonstrate that the staff employed to work at the home had the skills and experience needed to support the people who received care in the home.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. The DoLS apply to care homes and hospitals. No application had needed to be submitted.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing and signing their agreements to the care plans where possible. Specialist dementia advisors, mobility support and equipment needs had been identified in care plans when required.

The visitor and professionals we spoke with were able to confirm that they were able to see people in private and that visiting times were flexible.

The staff spoken with had a clear understanding of the care and support needs of the people living in the home. The relative spoken with said, 'The care mum receives is great - I am so pleased she lives here'.

The home had been award the 'Dementia Quality Mark'. This was a locally recognised award for the home that had made a, 'commitment to year on year improvements in the care it provides to people with dementia'.

Is the service caring?

Those people who were able to talk with us said that they were supported by kind and attentive staff. We observed that the staff showed patience when supporting people, particularly if people became confused.

People using the service had completed questionnaires on their satisfaction of the service provided. Residents' meetings were held to discuss and raise any shortfall identified. One person said, 'Carers check us overnight-this makes me feel safe' and another said, 'Couldn't be in a better place'.

All the people who used the service and the visitors we spoke with told us that they felt that staff were kind and caring. People told us that they were happy with the care and support that had been delivered and their needs had been met.

Is the service responsive?

Regular activities were arranged within the home including a weekly trip out. On the day of our inspection this was to a local tourist attraction. We observed people preparing to go out and comments from people as they were boarding the bus were, 'Can't wait', 'They have so many trips 'it's wonderful' and 'I am really looking forward to this trip-we always have a cup of tea and cakes!'

We looked at how complaints had been dealt with and we found that the responses had been open, thorough, and timely. People could therefore be assured that complaints were investigated and action is taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked in partnership with key organisations, including the local authority and safeguarding teams to support care provision and service development.

The registered provider was in the home each day and was actively involved in how the home ran, including assisting on the trip.

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. All the people spoken with were happy with the staff working in the home.

We were told there were 31 people resident within the home when we visited. We spoke with the owners (one of whom is the registered manager) and both managers who run the home on a day to day basis. We also spoke with 11 people who live in the home and two of their relatives. We also spoke with six members of the care staff.

We found that people's care and welfare needs were met while living at the home but not all the records of their care needs were up to date or reflected their current needs.

Staff were knowledgeable of people's care needs, trained to carry out their role fully and supported by a system of supervision and appraisal. People told us they felt the staff met their needs well and they felt safe in their care.

The home had a complaints procedure available for public view and we saw that any complaint had been investigated fully.

We found that the home had not told the Care Quality Commission of incidents when people had been injured or required emergency treatment as a result of an accident within the home or while in their care.

Before people received any care the staff asked for their consent and staff acted in accordance with their wishes. Throughout our visit we saw staff involving people in their care.

We saw and heard staff speak to people living in the home in a way that demonstrated a good understanding of people's choices and preferences. One person living in the home said, 'Been here 7 months-this is my home'.

Staff we spoke with were clear about the actions they would take should they have any concerns about people's care and welfare.

We looked at care records for four people living in Sunnymeade Residential Home. We spoke with staff about the care given, looked at records relating to them, met with them and observed staff working with them.

We saw that people's care records described their needs and how those needs were met. We saw that people's mental capacity was assessed to determine whether they were able to make particular decisions about their lives.

We spoke with all the staff working during our visit. Some of the staff had only been employed for a short time and one said, 'I love working here'. A relative said, 'The staff are so kind and this place is wonderful'.

We saw that Sunnymeade Residential Home had a complaints procedure available and documentation of complaints dealt with.

We spoke to one recent new admission and eight other people using the service on this occasion. Their comments included: 'lovely, lovely place'; and '(The owners) are very kind people'.

We observed staff interaction with people during the lunch meal being served and as they carried out their morning duties. We saw that staff treated people with consideration and respect.

Staff were clear about the actions they would take should they have any concerns about people's care and welfare.

We spoke with staff about their training, staffing numbers on duty and their understanding of how care was being delivered to people living in the home. We also asked staff how they manage the care for people with dementia and their understanding about these people's particular care needs. We observed staff provide reassurance to people who were confused.