CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sunnydale Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitor checks, PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place, with some limits caused by the building's layout.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 March 2021. It looked at how the home was preventing and controlling infections during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning, social distancing and infection control policies. Staff had received training, and people were supported to keep in touch with relatives.
The home could not use separate areas to isolate or group people because of its layout. The home planned to manage this by increasing cleaning, controlling use of communal areas and asking people to stay in their rooms when needed.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a Good, Outstanding, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to book, have their temperature checked, confirm their health status, use PPE and complete a lateral flow test before visiting.
“Visitors booked an appointment and were greeted on arrival.” from the report
Staff training and PPE
Staff had training on coronavirus symptoms, managing infection and using PPE. PPE was available.
“All staff used the appropriate PPE in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, with regular cleaning during the day.
“We found the home to be clean with regular cleaning taking place throughout the day.” from the report
Limited ability to separate people
minorThe building's layout meant the home could not use isolation, cohorting or zoning plans. The home described other measures to reduce the risk.
“Due to the layout of the building, it was not possible to use isolating, cohorting and zoning plans to manage the spread of infection.” from the report
No passenger lift
minorThe home is only suitable for people who can use the stairs. This may be important if your relative's mobility changes.
“The property does not have a passenger lift so is only suitable for people who are able to use the stairs.” from the report
- 01If there is an outbreak, how will people be separated when the building cannot use isolation, cohorting or zoning plans?
- 02How will people get help if they need to stay in their rooms during an outbreak?
- 03How often are communal areas and high-touch surfaces cleaned, and how is this recorded?
- 04How would the home support my relative if they became unable to use the stairs?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for visits, testing and PPE?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and no ratings were given for the other questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 June 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, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind, person-centred care and effective management, with end-of-life planning still developing.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 22 April 2018. It was the first inspection since the home was registered in 2017. Inspectors spoke with people, staff and managers, toured the premises, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines systems, clean premises, detailed care plans and kind support. People were involved in decisions, supported with health needs and encouraged to use the local community.
The home supports up to five adults with mental health conditions. Four people were living there during the inspection. The building has no passenger lift, so it is suitable only for people who can use the stairs.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were available, not rushed and knew the people they supported.
“There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff listened to people, respected their privacy and supported independence. People were involved in choices about their daily lives and care.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion by the staff and the service.” from the report
Person-centred plans
Care and support plans included people's health needs, risks, history, goals and aspirations. They were reviewed monthly or more often when needed.
“Support plans were reviewed monthly or more often when required and the review involved people.” from the report
Community and health support
People were supported to attend health appointments and use local services. The home worked with community mental health professionals.
“There were clear community links in this service.” from the report
Management oversight
The managers carried out regular checks and acted on identified actions. Feedback from people, staff and professionals was collected.
“There was an effective quality assurance system in place, which ensured continuous improvements at the service.” from the report
End-of-life planning
minorThe registered manager and deputy manager had completed end-of-life training, but the report says the plan was for all staff to complete it. Conversations about end-of-life care had not taken place unless people requested them.
“The registered manager and deputy manager had both completed end of life training, and planned to have all staff complete it.” from the report
- 01How will you check that my relative can safely use the stairs, given that the building has no passenger lift?
- 02Which staff have completed end-of-life training, and how will you support conversations about future care if my relative wants one?
- 03How will my relative be involved in writing and reviewing their care and support plan?
- 04How will you support my relative to manage their own medicines safely, if that is one of their goals?
- 05What community activities, health appointments and daily choices could my relative be supported to access?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five quality ratings assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 May 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 Sunnydale Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 April 2017.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of North Somerset
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 £1,050 to £1,320 a week. 19 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.