You are here

Archived: Sun Court Nursing Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 7 June 2018

The inspection took place on 4 April 2018 and was unannounced.

Sun Court Nursing Home is a ‘care home’ with nursing. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Sun Court Nursing Home provides accommodation and nursing care to a maximum of 29 people. At the time of the inspection 27 people were living at the home.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, 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. The registered manager was on leave at the time of the inspection, but we met with the registered providers and deputy manager.

At our last comprehensive inspection on 20 August and 1 September 2016 we found that the service was not meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider was in breach of the regulations for good governance. Following the inspection, the provider sent us an action plan telling us how they would make the improvements needed. During this inspection the service demonstrated to us that improvements had been made and is no longer in breach of the regulation.

Improvements included use of an external auditing company and the ground floor clinic room, described in the previous inspection report as the ‘nurse’s station’, was now partitioned off with a concertina door to improve security of medicines related paperwork, and longer term the service planned to install a permanent structure to separate this area from the main hallway.

Since the last inspection, greater emphasis has been placed on safe storage of people's records, with use of wall fixed document holders to enable care plans to be stored in people’s bedrooms rather than in communal areas, as identified during the last inspection.

Each person had detailed risk assessments and care plans in place, including personalised evacuation plans and management of individual risks such as skin care and swallowing risks.

Staffing levels reflected the use of a dependency tool, identifying the need for higher staffing levels in the morning to complete personal care routines.

Staff approach and people’s records demonstrated adherence to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People had choice of food and fluids, with value placed on nutrition and food quality.

Staff treated people with care and compassion, and took pride in their caring roles. Staff understood how to identify and report safeguarding concerns.

People accessed activities in the local community, maintained their spiritual wellbeing and spent time with relatives and friends.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint, and were encouraged to give feedback to the manager and providers.

The service provided a good standard of care to people who required support with complex health needs and those approaching the end of their life.

The service had governance processes in place for monitoring standards and quality of care provided, this included completion of regular clinical audits in areas such as medicines management and infection prevention control. The provider encouraged people and their relatives to give feedback on the service, and areas of improvement.

Inspection areas



Updated 7 June 2018

The service was safe

People had individualised risk assessments linked to care plans including personal evacuation plans, management of skin condition and swallowing risks.

People received their medicines as prescribed and at times to ensure clinical effectiveness.

Staff knew how to keep people safe and what actions they would need to take if they had any concerns.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs with flexibility built into each shift to allow for people�s changing needs and complexity.



Updated 7 June 2018

The service was effective

Staff received the necessary training for their roles and for nurses, this linked to reviews of clinical competency.

People's mental capacity was assessed, with best interests decision making in consultation with relatives and other professionals involved in their care and treatment.

Value was placed on the importance of people having choice of food and drink to meet their nutrition and hydration needs.

The service worked collaboratively with the GP and other healthcare professionals.



Updated 7 June 2018

The service was caring

People were treated with kindness, respect, dignity and compassion.

We received consistently positive feedback from people and their relatives about their care and treatment, the staff team and the service that they received.



Updated 7 June 2018

The service was responsive

People's care plans and risk assessments identified their care and support needs and contained clear guidance for staff to follow to ensure provision of consistent standards of clinical support.

People engaged with activities onsite and in the community.



Updated 7 June 2018

The service was well led

The service took account of the views of people who used the service, their relatives and staff to help drive improvement.

Robust auditing processes were in place since the last inspection.

Improvements to the storage of people�s confidential information were in place since the last inspection.