CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Sunbury Nursing Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Sunbury Nursing Homes was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and COVID-19 safety measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found robust arrangements for visitors and people moving in. People who tested positive for COVID-19 isolated in their rooms and were cared for by dedicated staff using suitable personal protective equipment.
The home appeared clean and hygienic. Staff used personal protective equipment correctly, cleaning had been increased, and the layout supported social distancing. Inspectors were also assured that testing, outbreak management and infection control policies were in place.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Visitor and moving-in controls
The home had systems to reduce the risk of infection for visitors and people moving in. Visitors were told about the arrangements before arriving.
“The service had robust infection control policies and systems in place for visitors to the service and people moving in.” from the report
COVID-19 isolation
People who tested positive were isolated in their rooms and supported by a dedicated group of staff using appropriate protective equipment.
“Where people had tested positive for COVID-19 they spent an isolation period in their room and were cared for by a dedicated cohort of staff who used appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Inspectors saw staff wearing PPE throughout the visit and staff could demonstrate how to remove it correctly.
“We observed staff wearing their PPE throughout our visit and they were able to show us the correct way in which to remove it.” from the report
Clean environment
The home appeared clean and hygienic, with extra cleaning tasks introduced to reduce the spread of infection.
“Additional cleaning tasks had been introduced to ensure the service remained clean and the risk of the spread of infection was reduced.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
Inspectors were assured that the home was accessing testing and had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the visitor and moving-in infection control arrangements being applied now?
- 02What happens if a resident tests positive, including how isolation and dedicated staffing are arranged?
- 03How do you check that staff use and remove personal protective equipment correctly?
- 04How often are extra cleaning tasks completed and checked?
- 05How are residents and staff tested, and what is the current plan for managing an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but some care records lacked important detail and cleanliness checks needed strengthening.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 29 June 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staffing, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, suitable support with food and healthcare, and kind and respectful care.
There were two main areas to improve. Four commodes were dirty, two needed repairs and two mattresses needed attention, although these issues were dealt with during the inspection. Some care records did not contain enough up-to-date information, so the provider received a recommendation.
The previous inspection had found breaches relating to risk assessments, care plans and monitoring the service. Inspectors found improvements had been made by this inspection, but records still needed further work.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff respect people's privacy, dignity, choices and preferred names.
“Staff treated people with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough suitable staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were completed before staff started work, and the home said it did not use agency staff.
“People were care for by a sufficient number of suitable staff.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff received training and had their competence checked before administering medicines without supervision.
“Medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely.” from the report
Good healthcare support
People could access GPs and other healthcare professionals when needed. Staff acted on changes in people's health and recorded the outcomes.
“People were supported to have access to healthcare services.” from the report
Activities and end of life care
People had access to activities in the home and local community, including individual time for people cared for in bed. Inspectors also found comfortable and dignified end of life care.
“People received comfortable and dignified end of life care.” from the report
Care records lacked detail
needs fixingSome records did not explain fully how to support people with mental health needs, end of life arrangements or an infectious condition. The provider was asked to make sure care information was current and complete.
“Some care records were lacking detail – we have made a recommendation to the registered provider in this respect.” from the report
Cleanliness issues found
needs fixingInspectors found four dirty commodes, two commodes needing repair and two mattresses needing cleaning. These issues were dealt with during the inspection, and the provider later sent an amended infection control audit system.
“However, despite the systems in place we raised concerns about the conditions of four commodes which were dirty, two of which needed to be repaired and two mattresses.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that every care plan contains current guidance about mental health, infection risks and end of life wishes?
- 02How often are commodes, mattresses and other equipment checked, cleaned and repaired?
- 03What happens if a new or temporary member of staff needs to rely on a person's care plan?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient when staff are absent or people's needs change?
- 05How are activities and one-to-one time planned for people who are cared for in bed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and the care provided; inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff and reviewed records and systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Sunbury Nursing Homes
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 March 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.