The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Sunrise Care - 14 Adelaide Street

14 Adelaide Street, Coventry, West Midlands, CV1 5GT (024) 7663 2852

Provided and run by:
Sunrise Care

All Inspections

29 May 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection was completed by one inspector. We visited the office of Sunrise Care and looked at records and spoke with the manager. After our visit we phoned and spoke with three staff, two people who used the service and one relative. We also contacted a social worker and a worker from the Penderels Trust (an advocacy service for people who received direct payments).The evidence we collected helped us to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people using the service and staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People we spoke with told us they felt safe.

Staff we spoke with told us they knew how to care for people safely. They told us they had received training and support to enable them to do this.

At our last visit, people's care records were not up to date. On this visit we saw people's records were up to date and reflected people's current needs. We saw risk assessments were in place and provided appropriate guidance for staff to follow.

Is the service effective?

People had an individual care plan which explained what their needs were. Risk assessments had been reviewed and identified current risks.

People told us they thought staff understood their needs and provided the support they required.

Is the service caring?

People told us staff were caring. One person said, 'It's the best care company I have had.' A relative we spoke with told us, 'They (staff) are excellent, X is first class.'

Is the service responsive?

We were told by a representative of the Penderels Trust the service was responsive to requests for last minute emergency cover to ensure people were safe.

People told us they would feel able to talk to the manager if they had any concerns, although the people we spoke with were satisfied with the service they received.

Is the service well led?

The service worked alongside other agencies such as social services and the Penderels Trust to ensure people received the care they needed.

The service worked with five people. The manager had a good understanding of people's needs and provided sufficient support to staff to help them provide good care.

People told us they knew the manager and were able to talk with them about their care.

5 February 2014

During a routine inspection

Sunrise Care is a small domiciliary care service. At the time of our visit it provided a service to four people. All people using the service were receiving direct payments or were self funding.

We visited the office of Sunrise Care to review records of people using the service, and to talk with the registered manager. We phoned three people who used the service to find out their views of the care they had received. We also contacted Penderels Trust Coventry (an advocacy service which supports people on direct payments to receive care).

People using the service told us,

"They're (the staff) are good, I would recommend them to anyone."

"They're very good and x (staff member) is a very good carer...she's genuine."

" I've been cared for, for 11 years and I would say this is the best agency I have had...they listen and understand what my needs are, I can't think of anything people could do better."

The advocate at Penderels Trust told us they had no concerns about the quality of care provided by Sunrise Care.

We looked at records. We saw initial care plans and risk assessments had been written, however these were not up to date and we could not be certain they accurately reflected the current care needs of the person.

6 February 2013

During a routine inspection

Sunrise Care is a small domiciliary agency which has been operating for a number of years. At the time of our visit the service was supporting six people with personal care. All six were paying for their own care.

We looked at the care records of three people and spoke with three people receiving care. We were satisfied people were receiving the care they had consented to.

People we spoke with were very happy with the support they were given. They told us staff arrived on time and treated them with dignity and respect. They told us that staff did what they expected them to do.

We looked at medication management. At the time of our visit the service assisted one person with their medication. We were satisfied staff were undertaking this safely.

We looked at the complaints policy and procedure. This gave people clear information about how to make a complaint. We were informed there had been no formal complaints made. People we spoke to told us they had not needed to make a complaint.

11 September 2012

During a routine inspection

At the time of this review the agency was providing care and support to five people and employed six care staff. People using the service were either private clients or receiving direct payments for their care. All five people supported by the agency had been clients of Sunrise Care for several years. One person told us 'The manager provides my care he is more like a friend than a carer'.

People who use the service told us they are involved and consulted about their care support. People told us staff are competent and know what they are doing. We were told that carers are reliable, always arrive on time and never rush people. People said they have regular carers who they get to know very well. One client spoke highly of her carer, she said 'We have really clicked' and 'she is a gift'. People we spoke with said carers are always polite and respectful.

The agency has a risk management procedure in place to make sure people remain safe and well. Care plans show risk assessments had been completed for all identified risk including moving and handling. People we spoke to said they felt safe during moving and handling routines and that staff were competent in using hoists. Care plans included pressure area management assessments and staff spoken with knew what changes to look for in skin conditions and when to refer changes to the GP or district nurse. Care staff were able to describe what they would do to keep people safe and were confident the manager would listen and act on any concerns they raised. Staff said they felt well trained and supported to do their job well.

At the time of this review the agency was not assisting people to take medication. Training records show that staff had completed medication training and would be able to assist people with this at short notice if required.

People we spoke with knew how to complain and would contact the manager if they were concerned about anything, but said they had never had cause to do so. We were told the manager visits them regularly and he is always contactable by phone if they want to speak to him.