CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Sunrise Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found risks from hot water, damaged furnishings and flooring, incomplete monitoring records, and delays in support at lunchtime. Medicines systems and safeguarding processes were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- A separate rating was not given for this question in this inspection report.
- Caring?
- Good
- A separate rating was not given, but inspectors observed kind interactions, choice and support with activities. People and relatives described staff as friendly and caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- A separate rating was not given. People had opportunities for interests and activities, and people and relatives were involved in care planning and feedback.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Audits and governance systems did not reliably identify or address risks and shortfalls. There was no registered manager in post.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and good medicines processes, but safety and management oversight needed improvement.
The inspection took place on 19, 20 and 27 April 2023. It was unannounced and involved two inspectors and an Expert by Experience. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, reviewed care, medicines and management records, and checked the building.
The home was not always safe. Inspectors found hot water outlets above recommended temperatures, damaged furnishings and flooring, gaps in some care records, and people waiting for help at lunchtime. Some of these issues were dealt with immediately, but the systems had not found them soon enough.
People and relatives described kind, friendly staff who knew people well. Medicines were stored and administered safely, people received healthcare referrals when needed, and people were supported to make choices. The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement.
Kind relationships
People and relatives described positive relationships with staff and management. Inspectors saw staff engaging well with people and helping them to feel comfortable.
“People and their relatives described positive relationships with the staff and management team.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored at the correct temperatures and stock matched the administration records checked. People were observed receiving medicines with time and support.
“People were observed being given their medicines and staff ensured people had a drink and the time they needed.” from the report
Healthcare support
People had access to healthcare services, and referrals were made when their needs changed. Staff also responded to falls and deteriorating health.
“People had access to healthcare services and appropriate referrals were made when their needs changed.” from the report
Environmental safety
seriousSome hot water outlets were above recommended temperatures. Several areas and furnishings were damaged or poorly maintained, which increased the risk of burns and infection spreading.
“Monitoring of water temperatures was undertaken to reduce the risk of burns, but we identified a number of outlets which were above the recommended temperatures.” from the report
Care records
needs fixingStaff did not always complete repositioning charts and other care records accurately or fully. This made it harder to confirm that care had been delivered as planned.
“However, staff were not always fully completing monitoring records such as repositioning charts.” from the report
Staffing at busy times
needs fixingStaff were very busy at lunchtime and some people had to wait for help. Staffing reduced later in the day, which could limit choice for people who wanted to stay up later.
“Staff were very busy at lunchtime, which meant some people had to wait for assistance.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousThe home's audits and governance systems did not identify or resolve the problems found by inspectors. This was a breach of Regulation 17.
“Governance systems and audits were in place but there were not sufficiently robust and had either not identified or addressed the issues.” from the report
- 01What has been done to check and control hot water temperatures throughout the home?
- 02Which flooring, bedside tables and bedrail covers have been replaced, and when will the remaining repairs be completed?
- 03How are repositioning charts and other care records now checked for accuracy and completeness?
- 04How will staffing be arranged at lunchtime and in the evening so people do not have to wait for help?
- 05What progress has been made with the action plan for the Regulation 17 breach, and who is now responsible for quality checks?
This inspection focused on Safe and Well-led; the report gives no separate ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive, and the previous overall rating was Good in 2020. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 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, January 2022
Sunrise Nursing Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection-control measures, with some tired equipment and premises still being upgraded.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 12 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures were affecting care.
Inspectors found plentiful personal protective equipment, daily staff testing and a clean, fresh-smelling home. They were assured that the home was managing visitors, admissions, testing, vaccinations, social distancing and infection risks appropriately.
Some equipment, flooring and parts of the building were tired or damaged and harder to clean. The provider had started redecorating and had an action plan, while a COVID-19 contingency policy was still being developed.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas.
Good infection-control supplies
The home had plentiful PPE and staff were following guidance on its use.
“There were plentiful supplies of personal protective equipment and staff were following the guidelines regarding its use.” from the report
Regular staff testing
Staff were taking daily lateral flow tests as an extra precaution to identify infections promptly.
“Staff were undertaking daily lateral flow tests as an extra precaution to ensure that any infections were identified promptly, reducing the risks to the people living in the service.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and fresh smelling. The provider had begun work to address damaged areas.
“The home was clean and fresh smelling throughout.” from the report
No reported COVID-19 outbreak
The report says the service had not experienced a COVID-19 outbreak.
“The service had never had a COVID19 outbreak.” from the report
Tired equipment and premises
needs fixingSome equipment and parts of the building were harder to clean because they were tired. The provider had a plan to upgrade them.
“The home was clean however some equipment and parts of the home were tired which meant that they were more difficult to clean.” from the report
Some damage still being repaired
minorSome areas had chipped paint and damaged flooring. Redecoration had started, but the remaining work was not yet complete.
“Some areas had chipped paint and damaged flooring, but the provider had started to redecorate and had an action plan setting out when the remaining areas would be completed.” from the report
Contingency policy still developing
needs fixingThe manager was still developing specific guidance for staff about what to do if there was an outbreak.
“The manager was developing a COVID 19 contingency policy to provide specific guidance to staff on how they should respond in an outbreak.” from the report
- 01Which areas with chipped paint or damaged flooring have now been repaired?
- 02What equipment or parts of the home were identified as harder to clean, and have they been upgraded?
- 03Is the COVID-19 contingency policy now complete, and what would staff do if there were an outbreak?
- 04How are staffing pressures being managed now, and what measures are in place if COVID-19 affects staffing?
- 05How are visits and safe admissions managed under the current infection-control arrangements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 January 2022 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 Sunrise Nursing Home
8 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- May 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- August 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 April 2019.
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 Suffolk
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
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.