Sunnyside is registered to provide accommodation and care for a maximum of three people who have autism and/or learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were three people living in the home.

There was not currently a registered manager in post. The manager was in the process of submitting their application to become the registered manager. For the purpose of this report they will be referred to as ‘the manager’ rather than a ‘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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Registration requirements were not always met. We had not been notified that the service was without a registered manager for over 28 days.

There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of service being delivered. The manager carried out weekly and monthly audits on every area of the service. The service manager also carried out an in depth monthly audit on all areas of the service. The audits were not always effective.

There were gaps in staff training. Not all staff had received training in food hygiene and infection control. Not all staff had up to date training in the safe handling and administration of medicines, nor were staff’s competency in this area regularly assessed. However, we found that medicines were stored and administered safely. Regular audits of people’s medicines were carried out and these highlighted any shortfalls in the safe management and administration of people’s medicines.

Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been identified and risk assessments detailed what steps should be taken to mitigate the risks. Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew the procedures for reporting any suspicions of abuse. Safe recruitment practices were in place to ensure that suitable staff were employed to work in the home.

Staff were supported in their work through regular supervisions and training appropriate to their role. Staff were able to access specific training which related to people’s complex support needs.

People’s mental capacity had been assessed and best interests decisions had been clearly documented where people were not able to make decisions about certain things. Most staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and understood the principles of the MCA.

People were supported to be as independent as possible. They were involved in making decisions about their care and their views and preferences were listened to. People were able to cook for themselves and were supported to go food shopping. Relatives were able to visit without restrictions and people were supported to visit their family. People’s interests were supported and they were able to pursue their hobbies and go on regular activities away from Sunnyside.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and knew people’s needs well. Staff knew how to communicate with people using their preferred method of communication. People’s right to privacy and dignity was consistently upheld and staff treated people with respect. People were able to access healthcare professionals where concerns had been identified about their health or wellbeing.

Individualised care plans for people were in place and they were updated and reviewed regularly. People were encouraged to talk about their wishes and aspirations and what support they needed from staff.

There was a complaints procedure in place and staff knew how to support people with making a complaint. People and their families were asked for feedback about the service and, where necessary, changes and improvements would be made as a result. Regular meetings took place for people living in Sunnyside which also gave people the opportunity to put forward thei

For this inspection we spoke with the manager, their staff, one person’s relative and observed an evening meal. We also reviewed people’s care records and service management information.

We reviewed the evidence we had obtained during our inspection and used this to answer five key questions we always ask: Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led?

This is a summary of our findings. If you would like to see the evidence supporting this summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

The service was staffed appropriately to ensure that people’s needs were met. We found that as well as undertaking the provider’s mandatory training, staff had undertaking training in specific areas relevant to the people they supported. For example, staff had been trained in ‘signalong’. Signalong is a sign-supporting system, based on British Sign Language, designed to help people with communication difficulties. We noted a staff member using this method to communicate with one person.

People and staff could be assured that their records were accurate, held securely and remained confidential.

Is the service effective?

During our visit we observed that people receiving care seemed content. Staff were responsive to people’s behaviours and familiar with people’s differing methods and meanings of communication. This helped ensure that people were supported effectively.

People’s dietary preferences were taken into account when meals were planned. People were supported to have adequate nutrition and hydration.

Is the service caring?

We observed that people were supported by kind and attentive staff. Staff were patient and encouraged people to do things for themselves.

A relative we spoke with told us that staff seemed genuinely fond of their family member. Staff had invited the family to a trip out to the circus which been enjoyed by everyone. The relative added that Sunnyside had provided “…..a huge amount of joy” to their family member’s life.

Is the service responsive?

The rigorous assessment process undertaken before people moved in to the home ensured that the service had planned in advance how to meet people’s needs and support their transition to living at Sunnyside.

Staff supported people to participate in meaningful activities in the home and in the local community. The activities included ones people could enjoy as a group and others were tailored more to people’s individual needs. For example, one person had a dislike of large crowds so activities were planned for them individually or as part of a smaller group which helped reduce their anxiety levels.

Is the service well-led?

The manager was clear about the ethos of the service. They ensured that knowledge, they and other experienced staff had, and access to helpful information was shared with other staff. Staff we spoke with were very positive about working at Sunnyside and told us that the manager was very supportive and approachable.

Quality assurance processes were in place. This meant that people could be sure that the service was monitored effectively by the manager and provider to ensure that the service continually improved. The service worked effectively with people, their relatives and other healthcare professionals to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.