Archived: Sunflower House

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

We found that people received safe care and support. Risk assessments were in place which included information about how to support people in a safe manner. The service worked with health care professionals to provide safe care. For example the speech and language therapy team had worked with a person who had difficulty swallowing to support them to eat safely. Medications were safely stored and administered although we found one incident of a medication not being in stock.

Is the service effective?

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. People we spoke with told us they were happy with the service and the support provided. One person told us "it's nice here" We found that care plans were in place which provided information about how to meet people's assessed and individual needs. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs and people were able to make choices about what they ate.

Is the service caring?

People told us the staff treated them well. One person said of a carer "I like her." We observed staff interacting with people in a friendly and respectful manner. Staff told us how they were able to meet people's needs in a way that promoted their dignity.

Is the service responsive?

People had signed their care plans which indicated their involvement with them and that they were happy with the contents of the plan. Care plans were regularly reviewed so that the service was able to be responsive to people's changing needs. We observed staff respond to people in a positive manner. For example one person requested that staff support them to access the community and this was seen to be arranged.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager in place and staff told us they found the manager to be approachable. Various quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place. Some of these included seeking the views of people that used the service, such as residents meetings. Records were stored securely which promoted people's confidentiality.

People's personal records and records appropriate to the management of the regulated activity were not complete and accurate.

Care plans were detailed and person centred. We found that some support needs which had been identified did not have a corresponding risk assessment in place to help staff work with and where possible minimise the risk.

Staff said they received the support they needed, however the staff rota did not demonstrate that people were given adequate rest periods. We viewed a random selection of policies and procedures and found these were in need to review and update.

At our last inspection on 18 February 2013 we found that not all of the records were accurate. Although there had been some changes in these areas there was still some further recording needed.

Care plans were detailed and person centred. We were told by staff that people make decisions regarding their activities on a day to day basis.

The home had been decorated and most of the planned refurbishment had taken place since our last inspection. We were told that the remaining work would be completed by the end of May 2013.

Not all staffing records were accurate and one person's communication plan required further development to reflect the agreed form of communication used to engage with this individual.