Archived: Sunnyview

Updated 16 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place over two days. On 27 March 2018 our visit was unannounced, however we told the provider we would return to complete the inspection on 3 April 2018. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and, on the first day only, an expert-by-experience with experience of supporting someone to use this type of service.

Before the inspection we reviewed all the information we had about the service, including past inspection reports, action plans and notifications about incidents which the provider is required to send to us. We also contacted other bodies such as commissioners, safeguarding teams and Healthwatch, which is a consumer champion which gathers information about people’s experience of using health and social care services in England. None of these bodies shared any information of concern.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, the area manager and four members of staff. We also spoke with four people who used the service, and spoke with two sets of relatives by phone whilst we were at the service. We reviewed two people’s care plans in detail, and looked at the stocks of medicines and administration records for three people. We spent time making observations around the service and looked at documentation relevant to the general running of the home, including that relating to audit activity, complaints, recruitment and the maintenance of the building.

Updated 16 May 2018

Our unannounced inspection commenced on 27 March 2018, and we returned for a second day on 3 April 2018. We told the provider we would be coming back for this day to complete the inspection. At our last inspection in November 2016 we rated the service as ‘requires improvement’ overall and identified two breaches of regulations related to safe care and treatment and good governance. We asked the provider to send an action plan to show how they intended to make improvements to address the issues we found. At this inspection we found they had followed their action plan and were now meeting the requirements of all regulations.

Sunnyview 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. Sunnyview is situated in Ferrybridge, with easy access to local facilities. The home provides services for up to seven individuals with learning disabilities and associated mental health needs. The home is on two floors, and each person has their own room. There is an enclosed garden, which people in the home can access. At the time of our inspection there were six people using the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen

There was a registered manager in post, who had been recruited since our last 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 told us they were safe at Sunnyview, and we saw the registered manager checked this was the case at regular service user meetings. Staff training and the provider’s processes meant people were well safeguarded, and we saw the registered manager investigated and reported any incidents appropriately. There were enough staff on duty to enable people to receive support when they needed it, and we saw records which showed staff had been recruited safely. We saw evidence of a good approach to equality of opportunity in recruitment practices.

People lived in a clean and well-maintained home, and we saw the registered manager ensured regular servicing of safety equipment.

Medicines were well managed. Stocks and records were up to date, and we saw documentation in place which supported good practice in this area. Staff responsible for administering medicines had regular training and observation of their practice.

Staff were well supported to be effective in their roles. They had access to appropriate training which was regularly updated, and attended supervision meetings to discuss their performance. People were supported to have good access to health and social care professionals, and there was accessible documentation in place to help people with appointments.

Care plans showed how people made decisions and how and when they may need support. Appropriate safeguards were in place where people could not make decisions, for example about where they lived. Independent advocates were involved in supporting people with their decision making.

We saw people could make choices about how they spent their time, and were able to have regular access to the community. People’s diet was tailored to their preferences and needs, and we saw healthier eating was promoted.

People told us they got on well with staff, and we observed this was the case. Care and support were provided in caring ways, and people were able to contribute to decisions about their care when they wished to. Care plans were person-centred and detailed, meaning staff had access to information about how each person wished to received care. People had access to a range of activities which they were supported to plan. People told us they would know how to complain if they needed to, and we saw there were systems in place to ensure complaints were responded to appropriately.

Care plans were detailed, kept under review and incorporated advice and guidance given by other health professionals. There was a focus on achieving positive outcomes for people and how this could be done. Care plans for end of life care were in the process of being rewritten.

We found there was good leadership in the service. The registered manager had driven significant improvements for people and staff, and was passionate about providing excellence in care. There were strong systems in place to monitor and improve quality in the service, and where incidents occurred there were robust systems in place to ensure any potential lessons that could be learnt were captured and acted upon.

People who used the service were encouraged to influence the service in meaningful ways, and we saw there was a very high commitment to equality of opportunity: the registered manager listened to and acted on suggestions from people and staff, and we received excellent feedback about their ability to provide outstanding care and leadership. Staff were well motivated and empowered and other health and social care professionals praised the service.