You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

This care home is run by two companies: Sunrise UK Operations Limited and Sunrise Senior Living Limited. These two companies have a dual registration and are jointly responsible for the services at the home.


Inspection carried out on 9 July 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Sunrise at Southbourne is a residential care home providing personal care to 79 older adults at the time of our inspection. The service can support up to 103 people. Accommodation is provided over three floors one of which specialises in providing care to people living with dementia.

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

People and their families described the care as safe. Staff had been trained to recognise signs of abuse and understood their role in reporting concerns. Risks to people had been assessed and actions had been taken to minimise the risk of avoidable harm whilst respecting people’s freedoms and choices. People had been protected from preventable infections.

Staff had been recruited safely including checks that they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. People were supported by enough staff to meet their care needs effectively. Staff had completed an induction and had on-going training and support that enabled them to carry out their roles effectively.

People had person centred care plans that reflected both their care needs and lifestyle choices. When people had been involved in end of life planning their spiritual and cultural wishes were understood and respected. Staff knew people well and understood their communication needs enabling them to be involved in decisions about their day to day lives. 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. People had their eating and drinking needs met and were provided with meal choice and well-balanced meals.

Medicines were administered safely by trained staff who had their competencies checked regularly. People were supported to live healthy lives and had access to healthcare services for both planned and emergency events.

People and their families consistently spoke positively about the care they received and felt their privacy, dignity and independence was respected by the staff team. People felt able to express their views about their care and the service. People were aware of how to make a complaint and felt they would be listened to and any actions needed taken.

The culture was positive, open and honest and lessons had been learnt and improvements made when things went wrong. Staff felt appreciated in their roles and spoke positively about their own roles and teamwork. Quality monitoring processes were effective at capturing the voice of people, their families and staff and driving improvements when needed.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was ‘Requires Improvement’ (published 11 September 2018) and there were multiple breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. Prior to the inspection we received a notification of a specific incident following which a person using the service died. This incident is subject to a criminal investigation. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. The information CQC received about the incident indicated concerns about the management of choking. This inspection examined those risks. We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the ‘Safe’ and ‘Effective’ sections of this full report.

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 informa

Inspection carried out on 26 June 2018

During a routine inspection

Sunrise of Southbourne is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Sunrise of Southbourne is registered for 104 people. There were 97 older people living in the home at the start of our inspection. People had a variety of care and support needs related to their physical and mental health. The home was divided into two main areas with people living with dementia accommodated on a separate floor called Reminiscence.

This unannounced inspection took place on 26 June 2018 with further visits to the home on 2 July, 4 July and 10 July 2018. We continued to receive evidence from the service until 19 July 2018. This was our first inspection of the service since the provider had changed.

There was a registered manager for the service; however, they had not been overseeing the home since the end of May 2018. They resigned their post during the time that we were inspecting. 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 previous registered manager, who knew the service well, had been appointed and had submitted their application to register with the CQC.

At this inspection we identified breaches of regulation with respect to: safe care and treatment, safeguarding adults, the deployment of staff, dignity and respect and the governance of the service including notifications. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Staff understood most of risks people faced. However, these risks were not always recorded and shared consistently and as a result care staff did not always act to reduce these risks.

People did not always receive their medicines as they were prescribed.

Staff encouraged people to make decisions about their day to day lives. However, care plans had not always been reviewed to reflect changes in behaviour. This meant that that staff did not always have guidance to follow to meet emerging needs.

People described the food as good.

Care plans also did not always reflect that care was being delivered within the framework of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This meant people were at risk of receiving care that was not in their best interests or was overly restrictive. The failure to apply the MCA appropriately had led to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards not being applied for a person we were told would be brought back if they left the home.

People were largely positive about the care they received from the home and told us the staff were kind. We observed that most care was delivered respectfully and with kindness but we also saw that some care practices did not promote dignity and that people were sometimes treated disrespectfully.

People told us they felt safe. Staff knew how to identify physical abuse and told us they would whistle blow if it was necessary. One person had not been protected appropriately because the safeguarding process had not been implemented effectively.

Quality assurance systems had not been effective in identifying the issues identified during our inspection and notifications that the provider was required to make to the CQC had not been made.

Care staff were consistent in their knowledge of people’s on-going care needs and spoke confidently about the support people needed to meet most of these needs.

Staff told us they felt supported in their roles and had taken training that provided them with the necessary knowledge and skills. There was a plan in place to ensure staff received refresher training as deemed necessary by the provider and enhance