Sunnyhill Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Staff understood people’s needs and worked well with health professionals to provide the best outcomes for people. The provider used recognised tools to monitor areas of concern in people’s health and implemented changes promptly to support people. People were encouraged to be independent where possible. Staff worked well together and communication was good. Staff were respectful of people’s choice and asked before supporting them. People had been involved in choosing activities and stating their preferences.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Relatives told us people’s needs were assessed prior to admission. This was completed by the manager or the deputy manager with people having a suitable representative with them to support and provide additional information when required. Assessments were used to support appropriate admission to the service. People received care and support tailored to their individual needs. For example, one person needed specific routines to be followed regarding their waking and bedtimes. These were recorded and staff knew to follow these routines to promote their health and well-being.

The manager and deputy confirmed the pre admission assessment was just the starting point for the assessment of a person’s needs. Further additional information was gathered following admission as people relaxed and settled into the service. Staff spoken to had a good understanding of people’s individual needs.

The computer system used provided a number of generic assessments that were completed for each person following admission. These gave a full overview of people’s needs. These were then refined with additional information to provide individual care plans that focussed on person centred care. The deputy manager confirmed the provision of tailored care plans was ‘work in progress’ as the system was replaced 8 months ago. ‘The basic information has been put onto the system. The system uses a lot of drop down arrows that can lead to contradictory information. So all need reviewing to ensure accurate and allow for person centred care documentation.’ Discussion with a visiting health professional confirmed when any restrictive practice was used including constant supervision. DoLs applications were applied for.

Relatives told us that they felt their family member's health and wellbeing was of high importance to the staff and service. People’s health and wellbeing was promoted by staff following best practice guidelines and taking account of advice from professionals. For example, people’s weight was monitored to identify any concerns that could be responded to.

Recognised risk assessments were routinely used to monitor and identify any risks to health and wellbeing. For example, a national nutritional assessment tool was used to monitor for any problems with eating, diet and weight gain or loss. These were then responded to with professional support. National risk assessments were used to assess people’s likelihood to develop pressure ulcers, and these responded to with best practice guidelines in mind. For instance, risk was monitored and equipment was used to reduce the risk further.

The computer system used had a number of recognised generic risk assessments to support the assessment and planning of care and support. All base line observations were reviewed each month as part of the ‘resident of the day process’. This supported on going assessment of people’s needs and care.

Relatives told us that the staff work well together, and with health professionals. One relative told us, “The staff are hypervigilant for any changes. They are always giving us updates and are so reassuring.”

Staff had regular contact with the local GP’s and worked with specialist advisors. For example, the psychiatrist had worked with staff to alter and adjust medicines to support people's level of well-being. Staff told us that they worked well together as a team to support people. One staff said, “We have a great staff team – they are all really supportive.” Another staff told us, “We help and support each other in any way we can.” The most recent staff survey showed that 100% of staff said they felt able to make suggestions to improve the work of the team, and all staff agreed that they always know what their work responsibilities are. The manager confirmed when communication was difficult with the local GP surgery she arranged a teams meeting with the dedicated clinical lead that supported the service to talk through communication issues.

Health professionals that we spoke with told us that staff were knowledgeable about people's health and support needs.

Information was shared between staff effectively through a handover meeting and an allocation sheet was shared with each care worker, with detailed information about who to support and how, and included any pertinent information or updates. Details were personalised about where and who people may like to sit with for meals and required staff to record how people were feeling.

We received positive feedback from people about the meals provided at Sunnyhill. One person told us, “The food is ok, but I am a bit finicky so if I don’t like it I do get something else.” Another person said, “The food is very good here.”

Staff told us, “Meals and food are very good and we encourage people to have a healthy diet – one lady doesn’t like vegetables but if we put small portions with the main meal, she eats and enjoys them.”

People’s preferences relating to their activities and lifestyle had been recorded. The activity co-ordinator had planned activities which matched people’s interests, for example one person who had been a keen table tennis player had been supported to do this again. We saw that people were encouraged to eat and drink independently where possible and that drinks were readily available.

Relatives gave us examples of how moving to the service had improved people’s outcomes. One told us that since moving to the service, “Is now really coming out of their shell.” Another relative said, “She is fine, in fact she has gone from strength to strength.” Another told us how their relative was very low in mood before moving to Sunnyhill. They said, “[relative] wouldn’t take part in anything, but now they [staff] do so much with them.”

Staff told us that they use a digital system to record how people’s health and mood are on a regular basis. They explained that where they have concerns, increased monitoring is put in place and recorded, as well as being shared at handover meetings and added to allocation sheets.

There were processes in place to ensure that care and support was provided appropriately. There was a system to ensure night checks took place as planned, with care staff having to scan a QR code to confirm and record findings. The digital care management system is set to alert management when incidents such as falls have occurred, and these are then tracked to identify patterns and to prompt action in order to reduce risks further.

Staff protected people's privacy, this included ensuring toilet and bedroom doors were closed appropriately and knocking before entering rooms.

Staff had an understanding of capacity and how people should be supported to make decisions. Staff understood that people’s capacity changed and always offered choices. One staff member told us, ‘We always ask people even if we know their likes and dislikes, we still ask and do not presume.’

Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) applications had been completed appropriately and subsequent DoLs assessment confirmed suitable procedures had been followed in line with the MCA. The computer had areas to record records relating to MCA and consent. Some of these needed further work to ensure appropriate records were stored appropriately.