We carried out an unannounced inspection on 8 August 2017 of Sunnyside Care Homes Limited – 410-412 High Road, which is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care for a maximum of seven people with learning disabilities. At this inspection there were three people living in the home.

At our last comprehensive inspection on 14 and 16 September 2015, we had found a breach of regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, as people had not been cared for in a safe environment and this placed them at risk in the event of a fire. People had not been adequately protected from risks, which resulted in a very serious incident at the home in August 2015. We also found concerns with training, activities and a full time manager not being in post. The home was rated Inadequate under Safe and Requires Improvement overall. We carried out a focused inspection on 20 June 2016 and found improvements had been made in these areas. The home had been rated Requires Improvement to ensure the improvements were sustained. At this inspection, we found the improvements had been sustained and therefore the home has been rated Good.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the associated regulations on how the home is run.

Staff were aware of how to identify abuse and knew who to report abuse to within the organisation and outside the organisation.

Risk assessments were in place that provided information on how to minimise risks to keep people safe. Individual fire safety risk assessments were in place to minimise the risk of fires. Regular fire alarms and evacuation tests were being carried out.

Premises safety checks had been carried out by qualified professionals, which included fire safety checks. Monthly safety checks were being carried out by the home. These checks did not highlight concerns.

Medicines were being managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed. Medicine records were completed accurately and were stored securely.

Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were fit and suitable to provide care and support to people safely. There were appropriate staffing levels.

Staff had received training required to perform their roles effectively. People were being cared for by staff who felt supported.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being followed. This ensured that people who lacked the mental capacity to consent to their care, treatment and support were being supported to do so in their best interests.

People had the level of support needed to eat and drink enough, and to maintain a balanced diet. People had choices during meal times.

People had access to a range of health care professionals if their health needs changed or they became unwell.

People had a positive relationship with staff. We observed staff were caring.

People were treated in a respectful and dignified manner by staff who understood the need to protect people's human rights.

There was a weekly activities timetable. People participated in activities regularly.

Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s preferences, interests and support needs. People and their relatives were involved with making decisions on their care.

Staff told us there was an open and inclusive culture within the home and the home was well-led.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place for continuous improvements to improve the quality of life for people.

This inspection took place on 20 June 2016 and was unannounced.

We had carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 14 and 16 September 2015 where a breach of legal requirements had been found. We found that systems were not in place to adequately minimise risk and to ensure that people were supported as safely as possible. After the comprehensive inspection the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breach.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the “all reports” link for Sunnyside Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Sunnyside Care Home provides accommodation and support with personal care for up to seven people with a learning disability. At the time of our visit three people were living there.

There was no registered manager in post as the previous registered manager was in the process of cancelling their registration and the current manager was in the process of applying to be the new registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers they are registered persons. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Since our last inspection the service had made improvements to raise the quality of care. We found the registered provider had taken sufficient action to ensure that people’s risk assessments were detailed and person centred. People were looked after by staff who had a good understanding of safeguarding.

The manager was well regarded by staff, relatives and people who use the service.

People received care from staff who had regular training and whose knowledge and skills were able to meet people’s needs. We saw staff were supported in supervision meetings with their managers. The service had safe recruitment procedures and new staff went through a comprehensive induction to make sure they had the confidence, skill and knowledge to support people well.

People were referred to other professionals as needed. People had care plans which were personal to them and they were asked to contribute to the plans in ways that suited them.

People were asked to say if they had concerns or complaints through using easy to read surveys and had been helped to complete these. People’s families were asked to say what they thought of the service through a survey and through talking with the manager and staff.

People were supported in a safe, clean and spacious environment where the manager carried out regular health and safety checks. Since our last inspection a new deputy manager had been appointed which ensured that managers were available. The premises had also been refurbished to a clean and modern standard.

As part of our inspection we spoke with five out of six people using the service, one relative and three members of staff working in the home on the day of our visit. One person who used the service told us, "I like it here. I like everything." Another person told us, "I like living here and staff treat me well."

There were systems in place in place for obtaining, and acting in accordance with, the consent of people who use the service in relation to the care and treatment provided to them. Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. We found people's needs were being met. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible and to use community facilities. One person told us "I get to go out a lot with staff and my family."

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

People were treated with respect and their care, health and welfare needs were met. A person who uses the service said "they treat me right. If they did not I would say treat me with respect but they do. They help me if I am not well.” A healthcare professional told us staff were very proactive with regards to people’s healthcare needs. People were supported to be as independent as possible and to use community facilities. One person told us “I go to church and to the cinema.”

Staff received the training and support they needed to carry out their duties and support people who used the service. One member of staff said “we have a lot of training and its mainly e-learning now. I have monthly supervision and get good support from the manager.”

The manager and the provider monitored the quality of the service to ensure that people received a safe service that met their needs. A relative told us “the manager does spot checks. A member of staff said “oh yes the manager does do checks at night.” Records showed that the provider carried out monthly monitoring visits and also that there had been a recent health safety audit.

We carried out an unannounced inspection on 8 August 2017 of Sunnyside Care Homes Limited – 410-412 High Road, which is registered to provide accommodation and support with personal care for a maximum of seven people with learning disabilities. At this inspection there were three people living in the home.

At our last comprehensive inspection on 14 and 16 September 2015, we had found a breach of regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, as people had not been cared for in a safe environment and this placed them at risk in the event of a fire. People had not been adequately protected from risks, which resulted in a very serious incident at the home in August 2015. We also found concerns with training, activities and a full time manager not being in post. The home was rated Inadequate under Safe and Requires Improvement overall. We carried out a focused inspection on 20 June 2016 and found improvements had been made in these areas. The home had been rated Requires Improvement to ensure the improvements were sustained. At this inspection, we found the improvements had been sustained and therefore the home has been rated Good.

The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the associated regulations on how the home is run.

Staff were aware of how to identify abuse and knew who to report abuse to within the organisation and outside the organisation.

Risk assessments were in place that provided information on how to minimise risks to keep people safe. Individual fire safety risk assessments were in place to minimise the risk of fires. Regular fire alarms and evacuation tests were being carried out.

Premises safety checks had been carried out by qualified professionals, which included fire safety checks. Monthly safety checks were being carried out by the home. These checks did not highlight concerns.

Medicines were being managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed. Medicine records were completed accurately and were stored securely.

Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were fit and suitable to provide care and support to people safely. There were appropriate staffing levels.

Staff had received training required to perform their roles effectively. People were being cared for by staff who felt supported.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being followed. This ensured that people who lacked the mental capacity to consent to their care, treatment and support were being supported to do so in their best interests.

People had the level of support needed to eat and drink enough, and to maintain a balanced diet. People had choices during meal times.

People had access to a range of health care professionals if their health needs changed or they became unwell.

People had a positive relationship with staff. We observed staff were caring.

People were treated in a respectful and dignified manner by staff who understood the need to protect people's human rights.

There was a weekly activities timetable. People participated in activities regularly.

Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s preferences, interests and support needs. People and their relatives were involved with making decisions on their care.

Staff told us there was an open and inclusive culture within the home and the home was well-led.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place for continuous improvements to improve the quality of life for people.