Archived: Sunrise of Eastbourne

Sunrise of Eastbourne is a 'care home.' People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Sunrise Eastbourne is a purpose-built location and is registered to support and provide accommodation for up to 107 people. At the time of the inspection there were 90 people living at the home. Sunrise of Eastbourne provides care and support for older people with various needs such as dementia and nursing. Sunrise of Eastbourne is described as a community which is divided into two neighbourhoods. The care home accommodates people across two separate neighbourhoods, both of which have separate adapted facilities. The home includes the Assisted Living neighbourhood which provides care and nursing for people dependant on their level of need and the Reminiscence neighbourhood which specialises in providing care for people living with dementia.

Sunrise of Eastbourne was last inspected in December 2016. The service was rated as Good in the domains of Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led. The service received a rating of Outstanding in Caring. At the current inspection the services overall rating had improved to Outstanding. The current inspection was undertaken because of changes to the providers registration. The providers Sunrise UK Operations Ltd and Sunrise Senior Living Ltd are dual registered and are both jointly responsible for managing the regulated activities at the single location, Sunrise of Eastbourne.

Sunrise of Eastbourne had a registered manager who had been in post since January 2015. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

People received exceptionally effective care, based on best practice by staff with an in-depth knowledge of their care and treatment needs. People were supported by clinical governance process that looked continuously to explore areas of leading practice and drive improvements for people’s quality of life. The service looked for, and promoted, innovative approaches to the delivery of care and support. Staff had very good skills in managing and reducing risk and keeping people safe whilst promoting people to lead fulfilling lives and minimise restrictions on their freedom. People received their medicines safely and on time from staff who were trained and assessed to manage medicines safely.

People received high standards of kind and compassionate care. People and their relatives told us the staff were extremely caring, kind, attentive and dedicated in their approach, which was evident throughout the inspection. They commended the exceptional quality of the care they received. We observed one person’s comments which stated, “The care home that everyone would wish for their most beloved.” People’s dignity and independence was protected, and the provider had given significant consideration, and promotion to, people’s diversity.

The service promoted the use of care champions in areas such as dementia, falls, wound care and equality and diversity, amongst others, who actively supported staff to ensure people were cared for in a way that promoted their wellbeing. The management and staff were proactive in working in partnership with professionals to enhance people’s health and wellbeing as well as staff’s knowledge and skills. There was a strong and dedicated focus on training and continued development for staff. The provider was excellent in ensuring that staff applied their learning and training into practice to deliver person-centred care that met people’s individual needs.

Staff were encouraged and supported to continuously improve their practices through specialist training, developing leadership skills, and seeking out guidance and information on best practices within the care sector. Staff worked very well together to ensure continuity of care and spoke highly of the support staff across the service gave each other. Staff worked hard to establish and maintain a strong and visible person-centred culture.

People received high quality food from award winning catering staff that ensured that it was of the highest nutritional value to promote people’s physical wellbeing. People were offered an outstanding variety of options, while people who required additional support, such as those living with dementia or those with specialist dietary needs were supported using safe and creative methods.

People received a very responsive service. Staff went above and beyond to ensure people’s needs and wishes were at the centre of everything they did. There was an extensive and varied range of social activities and opportunities. People used up-to-date and care-focused technology to enhance their physical, emotional and mental wellbeing. People’s care was very personalised and staff demonstrated an enthusiasm and responsibility to ensure that people’s individual needs and outcomes were met. Staff had individual roles and the service appointed a number of care champions who led on specific areas of support. The provider was extremely proactive in its supporting of people to engage and be involved. The provider had established outstanding links to other care organisations and partners, with local community groups and had initiated schemes that fully involved people at the service as well as engaging members of the public.

Staff were trained to be aware of signs of abuse and were encouraged to report concerns, which were investigated. A robust recruitment process was in place to make sure people were cared for by suitable staff. People knew how to raise concerns and were confident any concerns would be listened and responded to. Any concerns or complaints were investigated with actions identified to make improvements.

Staff were extremely knowledgeable about issues around consent and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff sought people's consent for their care and treatment and ensured they were supported to make as many decisions as possible. Where people lacked capacity, relatives, friends and relevant professionals were involved in best interest decision making.

The management of the service promoted an open culture and actively promoted inclusiveness amongst staff and people. The registered manager was passionate about driving improvement and demonstrated clear values and principles by which she ran the service. The provider and registered manager had implemented robust quality monitoring systems which they continually reviewed and evaluated to improve people's care. People received a consistently high standard of care because staff and management put people first and at the heart of the service. People, relatives and professionals spoke highly around the exceptional quality of care.

This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 1 and 2 December 2016.

Sunrise was inspected in May 2015. Two breaches of regulation were identified. Regulation 9, Person- centred care and Regulation 12, Safe care and treatment of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider sent us an action plan stating they would have addressed all of these concerns by October 2015. At this inspection we found these breaches had been met.

Sunrise had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 manager was in day to day charge of the home, supported by the deputy manager. People told us that they felt supported by the management team and knew that there was always someone available to support them when needed. Staff told us that the manager and deputy had a good overview of the home and knew everyone well. Staff went the extra mile to provide person centred care for people and were highly motivated to improve people’s day to day lives and had an excellent understanding of their needs.

We received many positive comments from people, staff and relatives. People said that they were able to question, discuss and be involved in changes and felt part of ‘the team’. People had a varied and active daily programme of activities offered. Staff had identified specific areas of interest for people and had gone out of their way to arrange special trips, organised pets visiting the home, and taken people out to events that were important to them.

Staff told us training provided was effective and ensured they were able to provide the best care for people. Staff were encouraged to attend further training, with a number of competency checks taking place to ensure staff understanding after training completed. When errors had occurred in relation to medicines the registered manager had ensured that all staff responsible for medicines had received further training and assessment. This showed a proactive response to facilitate on going improvement. There were numerous audits and a rigorous system in place to assess the quality of the service.

All required maintenance and equipment and services maintenance had taken place. Fire evacuation plans and personal evacuation procedure information was available in event of an emergency evacuation.

Medicine documentation and policies were in place. These followed best practice guidelines to ensure people received their medicines safely. Regular auditing and checks were carried out to ensure high standards were maintained. People told us they received their medicines on time.

There was a programme of supervision for all staff. Staff told us they valued the regular supervision as it was their opportunity to discuss their development and talk about their role.

Staffing levels were reviewed regularly to ensure people’s needs were met. Robust recruitment checks were completed before staff began work. And all new staff completed a 12 week induction period, which included shadowing a buddy and receiving training and support before being deemed competent to work unsupervised.

Care plans and risk assessments had been completed to ensure people received appropriate care. Care plans identified all health care needs and had been reviewed regularly to ensure information was up to date and relevant. People’s mental health and capacity were assessed and reviewed with pertinent information in care files to inform staff of people’s individual needs. We found some areas of documentation needed to be reviewed to ensure they were clear. This was addressed during the inspection. The co-ordinator responded to this during the inspection to ensure the information was clarified.

People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible and supported to participate in daily activities. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding on how to recognise and report abuse. Staff treated people with respect and dignity and involved people in decisions about how they spent their time. People were asked for their consent before care was provided and had their privacy and dignity respected. Feedback was gained from people this included questionnaires and regular meetings with minutes available for people to access.

People’s nutritional needs were monitored and reviewed. People had a choice of meals provided and staff knew people’s likes and dislikes. People gave positive feedback about the food and visitors told us they had eaten with their relative and found the food to be of a very high standard.

Referrals were made appropriately to outside agencies when required. For example GP visits, community nurses, chiropodist and speech and language therapists (SALT). And notifications had been completed to inform CQC and other outside organisations when events occurred.