You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile


Inspection carried out on 10 October 2017

During a routine inspection

Sunnyside Residential Home is a care home for up to 14 people. The home specialises in the care of older people. At the time of this inspection there were 12 people living at the home.

At the last inspection in August 2015, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to keep them safe and meet their needs. There were policies and procedures in place which minimised the risks of abuse to people. Where concerns had been raised the registered manager had worked in partnership with relevant organisations to make sure people were safe. One person told us, “I feel safe. I have that feeling that whatever happens they will take care of me.”

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to effectively meet their needs. When required, staff assisted people to access health and social care professionals to ensure they received the care and treatment they needed. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff at the home were kind and caring. People’s privacy was respected and people were able to socialise or spend time in the privacy of their rooms. One person told us, “I like it here. I can have privacy when I want it. You can please yourself.” People were involved in decisions about their care and were able to make choices on a day to day basis.

People received care and support in accordance with their individual wishes and needs. People were able to follow their own routines and make decisions about how they spent their time. There were organised activities arranged each day which people could take part in if they wished to. One person told us, “There’s always plenty to do here.”

There was a registered manager in post who was well supported by the registered provider. 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. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of care provided and to seek people’s views. The registered manager was very visible in the home and people felt able to raise concerns. One person said, “I would complain if there was anything to complain about but I always feel very well looked after.”

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Inspection carried out on 19 August 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 August 2015.

Sunnyside Residential Home provides personal care and accommodation for up to 14 people. The home specialises in the care of older people. At the time of this inspection there were 12 people at the home.

The last inspection of this home was carried in August 2014. No concerns were identified with the care being provided to people at that inspection.

There is 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 open and approachable which created a happy atmosphere throughout the home. People told us they would be comfortable to raise any concerns or make a complaint.

People felt safe at the home and with the staff who supported them. There were sufficient numbers of well trained, competent staff to ensure people’s safety and meet their needs. People told us staff were always kind and caring towards them and they felt well cared for.

Risks of abuse to people were minimised because the provider made sure all new staff were thoroughly checked before they began work at the home. Staff received training in how to recognise and report abuse and all were confident any issues raised would be fully investigated to make sure people were protected.

Staff monitored people’s general health and ensured they were seen by appropriate healthcare professionals. People said staff always contacted a doctor if they were unwell and arranged for them to see healthcare professionals according to their specific needs. One person said “They get the GP is you aren’t well. You also get your eyes and your feet done.”

People were involved in the planning and review of their care. Staff took account of people’s preferences and specific routines when supporting people. People told us they were able to make choices about their day to day lives.

People received support with personal care in private from staff who were respectful. One person said “The staff who help with washing and stuff are very gentle and respectful. New staff don’t help you until you know them a bit.”

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and plan on-going improvements. These systems included seeking people’s views in a formal and informal way.

There were regular safety checks on the building to ensure people’s safety and comfort. There were emergency plans in place to make sure people were fully supported in an emergency situation.

Inspection carried out on 29 July 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection set out to answer five questions: is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. It is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with people living at the home, and with the staff supporting them, and on looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. Staff treated people with respect. Safeguarding procedures were in place, and staff knew how to recognise abuse. Arrangements were in place to make sure that the registered manager and staff learnt from incidents and investigations. People’s care records, valuables and money were stored securely.

Is the service effective?

The service provided care in line with their wishes and individual needs. This was recorded in care plans. People’s health and care needs were assessed with them, and where possible they signed to show that they were involved in deciding the best care to meet their needs.

Staff were trained in appropriate areas of care.

People who needed extra support to make decisions were able to use an independent advocate.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and caring staff. All of the people we spoke with told us that they were happy at the home. They said it was friendly and had an inviting atmosphere. One person said, “I love it here.” Another described it as “excellent.” They said they could not fault the care provided. A visitor told us that their friend was “so well looked after. It’s really, really nice – they couldn’t do anything more”.

The provider conducted annual satisfaction surveys. The most recent survey showed high levels of satisfaction with the quality of care.

Is the service responsive?

The service responded to people’s changing needs. When people were unwell or they needed specialist assessment, the provider sought advice from community health and social care professionals.

There were residents’ meetings where people could suggest changes to the provider. We saw notes of these meetings that showed that the provider listened and made changes where they could.

No-one that we spoke with had needed to make a complaint since the last inspection.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a system of regular quality assurance that monitored care and showed where it could be improved. The provider had appointed a staff member to be responsible for monitoring compliance with essential standards. When the need for improvement was identified, changes were made.

Staff understood their responsibilities. They felt well supported by the provider and the registered manager. A visitor told us they were “impressed” with how the home was run.

Inspection carried out on 19 June 2013

During a routine inspection

At the time of our inspection there were 11 people living in the home. During our inspection we spoke with five people and two family members. We also spoke with four members of the care team, looked at three recruitment records and three care records of people who lived in the home. The home did not have a registered manager. However, there was an acting manager in place.

People living in the home told us they enjoyed living at Sunnyside Residential Home. Some people commented “I cannot think that any other homes could beat it” and “you can be rest assured I think they do a very good job, it’s more than just caring for you here”.

This was a planned inspection which included looking at areas of concern that were raised at our last inspection on 17 January 2013. At our last inspection we found people were not always given the opportunity to make their own choices about aspects of their care. We also found that some staff did not understand how the mental capacity act which protects people’s rights when making decisions on their behalf. We also found people’s care was not always assessed, managed or delivered to ensure risks to their health, welfare and safety were reduced. Finally we found he provider did not have an effective system in place to monitor and assess the quality of its service.

At this inspection we found significant improvements had been made. People spoken with felt their dignity was respected and the service provided a good level of care. People’s care records were person centred with appropriate information of how they wanted to be supported. Staff had a better understanding of the mental capacity act which meant decisions were made on people’s behalf appropriately. The provider recruited staff safely, ensuring checks were carried out to show employees were of good character and had the skills and experience necessary to carry out the role.

Inspection carried out on 17 January 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with four people who lived in the home, three relatives/friends of people who lived in the home, two professionals who visited the home and three out of the five carers working on the day of our inspection.

People we spoke with told us they felt safe living in the home. One person said “I would tell my relative if I was worried about anything and they would speak to staff on my behalf”. Another person said “I can express any concerns if necessary”. We asked people what it was like to live in the home. They told us “its alright here, we air our complaints and improvements are made, they do their best”. Another person said “I have always been happy here”.

The provider was currently trying to recruit a new home manager. The deputy manager was currently managing the home with assistance from the provider.

We found that staff sometimes made decisions on people’s behalf assuming that they knew what the person wanted. If a person required assistance to move staff were unaware of the right equipment to use so the person was moved safely. Staff were unclear what their role was and the role of other members of staff. The provider had assessed risks of people’s health, welfare and safety but had not provided information for staff on how to prevent or manage the risk.