CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sundial Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. The home had systems for safeguarding, risk assessments, falls management, medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this focused inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this focused inspection, although people and relatives spoke positively about staff and the care received.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this focused inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider was improving its management systems, but audits were not always up to date and there was no registered manager in post at the time of the inspection.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Sundial Lodge Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found people felt safe and received kind care, but governance checks needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection after concerns about falls risks. Inspectors visited on 4, 5 and 11 May 2023, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, risk, medicine and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. People said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable checks for falls, fire safety, medicines and infection control. Staff were safely recruited and trained, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
The main weakness was management oversight. Audits were not always kept up to date, and the registered manager had recently left. The provider had started improving its systems, but these changes were not yet fully established. The overall Good rating means the service met the relevant standards in the areas inspected, but improvements were still needed.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe and knew they could get help. The home used call buttons, checks and falls risk assessments where needed.
“I couldn't feel safer, it's all so good.” from the report
Kind staff
People described staff as kind, respectful and polite. Inspectors also observed warm and humorous conversations between staff and people.
“The staff are kind, always respectful and polite” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines were stored correctly and staff who administered them had been trained. People said their medicines were organised and given on time.
“They are very organised with the medications, the home arrange everything, even down to my eyedrops” from the report
People's independence and choices
People could manage their own medicines where appropriate and were supported to remain independent. They could also ask the kitchen for food when they wanted it.
“I'm independent, I do everything for myself” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked with health professionals and followed advice. Staff helped people contact health services when they needed support.
“Very good at checking pressure areas and alerting us” from the report
Management checks were not up to date
needs fixingThe provider had not maintained strong oversight of audits. New systems were being introduced after the registered manager left, but they were not yet embedded.
“The provider had not maintained good governance oversight to ensure audits were kept up to date by the registered manager.” from the report
Falls oversight was being improved
needs fixingThe local authority had raised concerns about managing falls and spotting emerging risks. The provider had changed its admission criteria and was improving its falls records and systems.
“The local authority had expressed concerns to us about the provider's management of falls and identifying emerging risk.” from the report
Some staff felt rushed
minorAlthough inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, some staff felt rushed and some people wanted more time to talk with staff.
“Staff told us they sometimes felt rushed, and some people told us they wished staff had more time to sit and talk.” from the report
No registered manager at the visit
needs fixingThe registered manager had recently left and the provider was advertising and interviewing for a replacement.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post, as the registered manager had recently left.” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and when will the registered manager post be filled?
- 02How are you checking that the new governance and audit systems are now complete and being used consistently?
- 03How do you identify new or increasing falls and mobility risks, and what happens if the home can no longer meet someone's needs?
- 04How do you decide staffing levels based on people's individual needs rather than just the number of people living here?
- 05What has been done about staff feeling rushed and people wanting more time to talk?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the report did not give new ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 July 2023 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, April 2021
Sundial Lodge Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 24 February 2021. It checked how the home was preventing and controlling COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visits, including pre-booking, temperature checks, lateral flow testing, hand sanitiser and a visiting pod. Residents were also helped to keep in touch with family and friends using electronic devices.
Inspectors were assured about testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, hand hygiene, social distancing, new admissions and outbreak planning. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full quality rating.
Controlled visiting
Visits were pre-booked and included checks to reduce the risk of infection. A visiting pod and clear procedures were in place.
“All visits were pre-booked and the care home had a visiting 'pod' with appropriate screening in place.” from the report
Infection control training
Staff had training in infection control, including COVID-19 procedures. The home also carried out regular hand hygiene and infection control audits.
“All staff had received training on infection control processes, which included specific COVID-19 training.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
The home had arrangements for staff testing, safe admissions and isolation. It also had a business continuity and pandemic action plan.
“The care home knew where to access appropriate support and guidance and there was a business continuity and pandemic action plan in place, which were routinely reviewed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked and supported to visit residents?
- 02Are staff still tested and vaccinated where appropriate, and what happens if someone has COVID-19 symptoms?
- 03How would a new resident be tested, admitted and isolated if needed?
- 04How are infection control and hand hygiene audits carried out now, and what happens when they identify an action?
- 05What are the current arrangements if there is an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full rating of the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 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.
Every inspection of Sundial Lodge Care Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 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
21 live-in carers within about an hour of Torbay
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 £1,400 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.