Archived: Sunrise of Guildford

Sunrise of Guildford is a nursing and residential care home that can support up to 101 people. The ground and first floor provide accommodation for people described as requiring assisted living, this part of the home is called the ‘Assisted Living Neighbourhood’. The care provided includes a range of care and nursing needs that include minimal support for people up to nursing care. Some people led a mainly independent life and used the home's facilities to support their lifestyle. Other people had various health care needs that included physical and medical conditions including diabetes, strokes and end of life care. Some people had limited mobility and needed to be supported with equipment to help them move around. Some people lived with dementia that required regular prompting and supervision to lead a fulfilling life.

The second floor provided accommodation for people who were living with dementia. This floor was called the ‘Reminiscence Neighbourhood’.

At the time of the inspection, care and support was being provided to 73 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The deployment of staff did not consistently promote positive outcomes for people. Some staff told us that they did not always get the time they wanted to spend with people and promote their social, emotional and psychological care needs. People had access to their own individual call bells. However, staff’s response time could be varied. One person told us, “I do feel safe here but sometimes I do have to wait to have my call bell answered.” We have made a recommendation about staff deployment.

People and their relatives spoke highly of the home. One relative told us, “The best thing they do is genuine personalised care. It’s a lovely place to be and they make it very homely.” Another relative commented, “I’m very pleased with the care. The staff are always enthusiastic and professional.”

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Risks to people's health and well-being had been assessed and monitored to ensure they were kept safe. The provider had safeguarding systems and processes in place to keep people safe. Staff knew the risks to people and followed the assessments to ensure they met people's needs.

The environment was clean and staff observed and followed infection control procedures in line with national guidance for reducing the spread of Covid-19.

Staff spoke positively about management. They felt well supported and they could talk to the management team at any time, feeling confident any concerns would be acted on promptly. One staff member told us, “Management are ever so supportive.” Positive links with the local community had been established. People were supported to go out and about and the home had its own minibus which people could access.

Equality and diversity was at the forefront of the service. Staff had received training on equality and diversity and spoke positively of the multicultural nature of the home and staff team. People were treated with dignity, respect and kindness and were involved in decisions about their care.

People told us that they made friendships and felt happy at the service. One person told us, “I’ve no reason to be unhappy here. It’s lovely. The staff are wonderful and very respectful.”

People received personalised care that met their needs and respected their preferences. Care plans gave staff clear guidance and staff followed these plans. People enjoyed activities that reflected their hobbies, interests and lives. People were supported with care and kindness at the end of their life. Staff were also passionate about delivering dignified and compassionate end of life care.

People had regular access to health care professionals. A GP visited the home on a weekly basis and staff were prompt in responding to any change in health care needs. Staff also worked in partnership with healthcare professionals, including dietitians; speech and language therapists and tissue viability nurses. We found that the design and layout of the building met people's needs and promoted dignity

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service under the previous provider was Good (report published 28 April 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

The ground and first floor provides accommodation for people described as requiring assisted living, this part of the home is called the Assisted Living Neighbourhood. The care provided includes a range of care and nursing needs that include minimal support for people up to full nursing care. Some people lead a mainly independent life and used the home’s facilities to support their lifestyle. Other people had various health care needs that included physical and medical conditions that included diabetes, strokes and end of life care. Some people had limited mobility and needed to be supported with equipment to help them move around. Some people lived with mild dementia that required regular prompting and supervision to lead a fulfilling life.

The second floor provided accommodation for people who were living with a dementia as their primary care need. This unit is called the Reminiscence Neighbourhood.

On the day of our inspection there were 96 people living in the home

This inspection took place on 26 April 2016 and was unannounced.

The home had a registered manager who was present during the inspection. 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.

People said that they felt safe and they appeared happy and at ease in the presence of staff. Staff had written information about risks to people and how to manage these in order to keep people safe. Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and their responsibilities for reporting accidents, incidents or concerns.

People felt safe and staff knew what actions to take to protect people from abuse. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and were able to tell us the procedures to follow should they have any concerns

Care was provided to people by a sufficient number of staff who were appropriately trained. People did not have to wait to be assisted.

The service followed safe recruitment practices. Staff were skilled and experienced to care and support people to have a good quality of life. Staff received support to understand their roles and responsibilities through supervision and an annual appraisal. They received training during their induction and then on an on-going basis.

People received their medicines in a safe way and when they needed them. Medicines were ordered, stored, administered and recorded safely.

People told us care staff treated them with dignity and respect. Care staff respected people's

individuality and encouraged them to live the lives they wanted.

People said that they consented to the care they received. The home was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People said that they were involved in making decisions about their care as much as they wanted to be. Relatives told us that the home was proactive in letting them know of changes to their loved ones care or medical conditions

People said that the food at the home was good and that their dietary needs were met. Facilities were available for staff to make or offer people snacks at any time during the day or night.

People had care plans in place for staff to follow in order to meet their individual needs. Monitoring systems were in place to ensure people’s needs were being met in line with their care plans.

People said that they were happy with the medical care and attention they received and that staff were knowledgeable about their needs. People had access to a range of external health and social care professionals.

People said that staff treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff were seen to discreetly advise people when they required attention to their personal care and this was always provided in private. Staff were aware of people’s individual needs and able to explain their likes, dislikes, background history, and specific care needs.

People said that they enjoyed taking part in the activities provided at the home and that they felt that there was enough to do. We saw that the activities that took place were inclusive, and well matched to peoples’ interests and capabilities.

People said that they felt confident to rise concerns and complaints and that these would be responded to. Monthly residents meeting took place where people were able to raise issues and concerns if they wished to.

People were at the heart of the service. The provider's philosophy, vision and values were understood and shared across the staff team. People's right to lead a fulfilling life was enshrined in a charter of rights, which was displayed in the entrance to the home.

The provider had effective quality assurance systems in place, including regular audits on health and safety, infection control, dignity, care plans and medicines. Meetings took place with the registered manager and members of staff and representatives of the provider to ensure information was shared to drive improvements.

The registered manager met CQC registration requirements by sending in notifications when appropriate. We found both care and staff records were stored securely and confidentially.