Sunnyside Respite Service is a 15 bedded service providing respite and long stay nursing care to people with learning disabilities. Each person’s room is provided with all necessary aids and adaptations to suit their individual requirements. The service is provided in two separate buildings. There are well appointed communal areas for dining and relaxation. The service is located in the Rotherham suburb of Sunnyside.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Staff were knowledgeable about how to recognise signs of potential abuse and aware of the reporting procedures. Assessments identified risks to people and management plans to reduce the risks were in place. People we spoke with told us they felt safe and relatives also said the home provided safe care.

Recruitment processes were robust so helped the employer make safer recruitment decisions when employing new staff. Staff had completed an induction at the beginning of their employment. They had access to a varied training programme and regular support and supervision was available to help them meet the needs of the people they cared for.

At the time of the inspection there was sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs. Relatives we spoke with confirmed when they visited there were sufficient staff on duty.

Systems were in place to make sure people received their medications safely, which included key staff receiving medication training and regular audits of the system.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were treated with respect .People and their relatives told us staff were kind and very caring. Staff demonstrated a good awareness of how they respected people’s preferences and ensured their privacy and dignity was maintained. We saw staff took account of people’s individual needs and preferences while supporting them.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and care plans were in place. However, these needed updating. The registered manager told us this had been identified and was being actioned.

People had access to activities and stimulation, as well as regular outings into the community.

There was a system in place to tell people how to raise concerns and how these would be managed. People told us they would feel comfortable raising any concerns with the management team.

There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Action plans were implemented for any improvements required and these were followed by staff.

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and had access to policies and procedures to inform and guide them.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

We observed interactions between people and staff this was positive and inclusive. People told us they were happy and we saw people enjoying activities.

People were asked for their consent before staff provided support or treatment. For example people were choosing what they wanted to eat for their lunch when they returned from an outing.

Relatives we spoke with told us the staff were very good they treated people with respect and dignity and people were always given choices.

We found that medicines were recorded and administered safely and appropriately. Staff explained to us the procedures in place to ensure this.

We found there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff employed to meet people’s needs.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

We spoke with people who received a service and one relative. People who spoke with us said they were happy at Sunnyside. The relative we spoke with told us they had confidence that carers had the knowledge and skills to support their relative.

There was an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

We looked at two outcomes to assess whether the provider had complied with warning notices we issued in December 2012.

Improvements had been made in relation to medication. Stock checks were carried out on a nightly basis and the identification and recording of any errors was clear and accurate.

People’s personal records had improved. They were accurate and mostly fit for purpose. They contained sufficient detail so that staff understood how to meet people’s needs and deliver care in a safe and appropriate manner.

We identified during the course of the inspection that the arrangements for auditing the service were not adequate. This meant that areas requiring improvement were not always recognised and addressed.

We looked at files belonging to eight people who were using the service on the day of the inspection and found that care records in seven of the files had not been reviewed or were incomplete, and some contained contradictory information.

We looked at the medication records of seven people who were using the service on the day of the inspection, and found that there was evidence of non-compliance in six of the seven records we looked at.

People we spoke with told us they were very happy with the care and support they received at Sunnyside Respite Centre. One person told us that they really liked their room; they told us “it’s good”. We spoke with a relative of one person who uses the service, who told us “it’s a great place; I wouldn’t have wanted her to go into a home until I saw this one”.

Many of the people using the service at the time of the inspection were not able to tell us about their experience. We therefore used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. Using this, we saw that people experienced care and support from staff who understood their needs, and spoke to them with respect and warmth.

Sunnyside Respite Service is a 15 bedded service providing respite and long stay nursing care to people with learning disabilities. Each person’s room is provided with all necessary aids and adaptations to suit their individual requirements. The service is provided in two separate buildings. There are well appointed communal areas for dining and relaxation. The service is located in the Rotherham suburb of Sunnyside.

The home had a registered manager who had been registered since 2004. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.

We last inspected the service in December 2013 and found they were meeting the regulations we looked at.

People told us they felt safe in the home and we saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable on safeguarding and were able to explain the procedures to follow should an allegation of abuse be made.

The registered manager told us some staff had recently delayed in reporting an incident, which she had dealt with. The staff were aware they should have reported it sooner but were unsure as it was relating to an agency worker. We saw that the registered manager had dealt with this appropriately and taken immediate action to ensure that it did not happen again.

People were protected against the risk of unlawful or excessive control or restraint because the provider had made suitable arrangements for staff to respond appropriately to people who communicated through their behaviour or actions.

The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were only used when it was considered to be in the person’s best interest. This legislation is used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own. The registered manager demonstrated a good awareness of their role in protecting people’s rights and recording decisions made in their best interest.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.

Suitable arrangements were in place and people were provided with a choice of healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met.

People’s physical health was monitored as required. This included the monitoring of people’s health conditions and symptoms so appropriate referrals to health professionals could be made.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The support plans contained a good level of information setting out exactly how each person should be supported to ensure their needs were met. Care and support was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and staff knew people well. The support plans included risk assessments.

Our observations during the inspection evidenced staff had good relationships with the people living at the home and the atmosphere was happy, relaxed and inclusive.

We also observed interactions between staff and people living in the home and staff were kind and respectful to people when they were supporting them. Staff were aware of the values of the service and knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

A wide range of activities were provided both in-house and in the community. We saw people were involved and consulted about all aspects of their care and support, where they were able, including   any suggestions for activities. Some people told us they would like more access to the community, especially at weekend when this was difficult if the respite service was full.

The registered manager told us they had received no formal complaints in the last twelve months, but was aware of how to respond if required. People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about living at the home. Relatives we spoke with told us they had no concerns but would discuss with the staff or manager if they needed to raise any issues. They told us if they had raised concerns in the past they had always been dealt with appropriately.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by the registered manager and the company’s regional manager. The reports included any actions required and these were checked each month to determine progress.