All inspections: Sunnyview House - Care Quality Commission

The assessment of Sunnyview House took place from 28 July to 5 August 2025. The service provides care for adults over and under 65 years, including those living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 72 people were living at the service. At this inspection, the service was rated Good, an improvement from the previous Requires Improvement rating which was completed in October 2024. Improvements had been made since the last inspection and the provider is no longer in breach of regulation.

People were protected from avoidable harm through a proactive safety culture. Staff were open and honest, and lessons from incidents were shared and embedded. The environment was clean and well maintained, with improvements made to equipment storage and routine safety checks. Medicines were managed safely, and person-centred protocols were in place. Staff followed infection prevention and control procedures consistently.

Staffing levels were safe, and staff were skilled and supported. Leaders had introduced competency checks and observational monitoring, which improved consistency and quality of care. People were involved in managing risks and had personalised assessments to support safe choices.

Leadership was strong and inclusive, with a shared vision that drove rapid improvements. Governance systems were robust, and audits were used to celebrate success and identify areas for development. Staff felt able to speak up and reported a fair and inclusive culture. The service worked effectively with health and social care partners, and leaders used feedback and data to improve outcomes. There was a clear commitment to learning and innovation, with positive changes embedded since the last inspection. The overall culture was person-centred, open and focused on continuous improvement.

This assessment was carried out between 24 October and 15 November 2024. The assessment included a site visit to the home on 24 October 2024 to 6 November 2024.

Sunnyview is a care home providing personal care to adults, some of whom were living with dementia. At the time of our assessment 76 people were living in the home. We carried out an assessment because there had been concerns identified regarding the quality and safety of the home. At this assessment we found 2 breaches of regulation which concerned safe care and treatment and good governance. People did not always receive safe care. The provider did not have effective systems in place to ensure people were safeguarded from potential harm and abuse. There was poor oversight at the service, which meant risks were not effectively identified and acted on. Governance systems and audits were not effective in identifying or addressing areas for improvement. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to our concerns.

About the service: Sunnyview House Care Home provides nursing and personal care to people aged 65 and over. The home accommodates 84 people across three separate floors. Each floor has separate adapted facilities for providing residential, nursing and dementia care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found: The provider protected people from harm or abuse. People and relatives told us staff cared for people safely. Staff followed individual risk assessments to reduce risks to people. Accidents and incidents were analysed to identify trends to help the provider prevent them from happening again. People told us they received their medicines on time and as prescribed.

Staff provided care and treatment based on a thorough assessment of people’s needs and preferences. The provider fostered a culture of celebrating diversity amongst people living in the home. Staff were well trained and well supported in their roles.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff cared for people as individuals and respected people’s individual views, choices and decisions. People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring in nature.

People received personalised care and support, tailored to meet their needs and preferences. People were provided with a varied programme of activities that promoted social interaction and connected with people's interests.

People, relatives and staff told us the home was well-managed. There was a clear focus on delivering a high-quality, individualised care.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated requires improvement (published 2 May 2018).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

This inspection took place on 28 February and 8 March 2018 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in January 2016 we found that the service was good.

Sunnyview House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care home accommodates up to 84 people across three separate units, each of which have separate adapted facilities. One of the units specialises in providing care to people living with dementia, another provides care to people requiring nursing care, and the third was designed for people requiring residential care.

The service did not have a registered manager in post. It is a condition of a service’s registration with CQC that there is a registered manager. The service had appointed a manager in December 2017 who was in the process of registering with CQC at the time of the inspection. 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.

People and relatives of people using the service we spoke with told us they felt the service was a safe environment. Staff were trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and there was a robust safeguarding process in place.

Staff and people told us staffing levels were improving, and there were enough staff to care for people safely. Staff were recruited following robust recruitment processes.

Medicines were managed safely, and people were happy with the way they received their medicines.

The premises and estate was well maintained and clean. There were measures in place to prevent the spread of infection.

The service conducted mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions, however on one unit we found that practice was not always in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). We have made a recommendation about the management of mental capacity assessments and best interests decisions.

People were supported to maintain a healthy lifestyle and their health was monitored with tools recommended in line with national guidelines. The service was proactive in accessing healthcare professionals on behalf of people using the service.

People and their relatives told us staff were caring and compassionate. Staff knew how to protect people’s dignity and privacy, and helped people maintain their independence.

There were not enough resources in place to provide people with meaningful activities and stimulation which took into account their interests. We have made a recommendation around the provision of activities.

People’s care was planned in a person centred way and people were confident they knew how to raise a complaint.

The new manager had made improvements to the service with support from the provider. There was a quality monitoring system in place, and there was evidence this had been used to improve the service. Staff told us morale had improved and that they would recommend the service as a place to work and receive care.

We inspected Sunnyview House on the 14 January 2016 and the visit was unannounced. At the last inspection in November 2013, we found the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected.

Sunnyview House is a purpose built home providing care for up to 84 people requiring personal and nursing care. Accommodation is on three levels accessed by stairs and two lifts. All rooms have en-suite facilities and all floors provide communal lounge and dining areas.

At the time of the inspection, the service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

People told us they felt safe. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding vulnerable adults and knew what to do to keep people safe. People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines safely.

We found there were systems in place to protect people from risk of harm and appropriate recruitment procedures were in place. There were policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and could describe how people were supported to make decisions. Where people did not have the capacity; decisions were made in their best interests.

There were enough staff to keep people safe. Staff training and support provided staff with the knowledge and skills to support people safely.

People told us they received the support they needed with meals and healthcare. Health, care and support needs were effectively assessed. People had regular contact with healthcare professionals; this helped ensure their needs were met.

People were supported by staff who treated them with kindness and were respectful of their privacy and dignity. People participated in a range of activities and were able to choose where they spent their time.

The service had good management and leadership. People had opportunity to comment on the quality of service and influence service delivery. Effective systems were in place which ensured people received safe and quality care. Complaints were welcomed and were responded to appropriately.

During our visit, we had the opportunity to talk with eight people who used the service and with three visitors. People told us they were happy with the care and support they received.

People who used the service said, 'It's a fantastic home; staff are brilliant and really helpful.' A relative told us 'They take good care of (name of relative), and get her to do things that we couldn't.' Another relative told us, 'They get lots of choices, and they discuss any changes in care with us' and 'I have never seen an unhappy resident, I have no concerns whatsoever.'

A relative also said, 'It's always spick and span; they wash carpets and shampoo them.' One person who used the service said, 'The staff keep it nice and clean, it's perfect, I couldn't wish for anything better.'

The home was very clean and had systems in place to reduce the risk of infection.

People who used the service told us there were always plenty of staff on duty and they felt able to approach staff when they wanted to. Relatives we spoke with told us they felt staff listened to them. They told us they felt involved in decisions regarding their relatives care.

Records showed the work staff did was supervised and all staff received monthly supervision and annual appraisals of their work and performance and a record was kept. Staff said they felt well supported and regularly discussed their own performance and their development with a supervisor.

We found the provider requested feedback from people who used its services, relatives and staff, and took action to address any concerns.

During our visit we spoke with six people who lived at the home and five visiting relatives to gain their views. One person commented; 'This is a home from home, it couldn't be any better.' A relative explained; 'This is a really nice place. We feel so lucky to have got a place here.'

At this visit we observed people's experiences of living in the home and their interactions with each other and with staff. During our observation we saw people looked well presented and seemed relaxed and well cared for. We saw people looked comfortable when interacting with staff. People spoken with said they were happy living in the home and would not hesitate to raise concerns if they had any. One person said; 'I feel very safe here.' Another person said; 'I have no worries or concerns about this place.'

We reviewed four people's care records and found information relating to people's care and well-being were kept in separate files in different places, such as weight charts and fluid balance charts. We discussed this with the manager who explained that some information was held separately for ease of access for the staff on duty. The manager agreed to review this practice to ensure people's care and welfare was not put at risk.

We spoke with seven members of staff who told us they enjoyed working at the home. One member of staff commented; 'I really love working here. The staff team is really good and we get on well.'

The local authority Commissioners told us they had no concerns about the service. There have been no safeguarding issues or any other concerns identified.

People using the service and visitors told us they are satisfied with the service they receive and their dignity and privacy is respected. People said the environment is always clean and pleasant. People we spoke to said if they have any concerns they are happy to raise them with the staff or management and are confident they will be dealt with appropriately.

Visitors told us they were happy their relatives are receiving appropriate care. They told us they are kept informed about their relatives care. One visitor said 'When I visit I find the staff very respectful to me and other people'. Another said 'I have always been happy with the quality of care that is being provided and have always felt if I had any concerns the manager would address it'. Another said 'My mom has improved so much she has gained weight since moving into this home'

Staff told us that people receive a good service and they can make decisions about their care. They said people can choose what time to get up and go to bed, what to eat and what activities to get involved in. Staff said they are confident that the management of the home would deal with safeguarding issues or concerns appropriately and systems are in place to make sure people are safe. Staff told us there is generally enough staff and they receive appropriate training to help them understand how to do their job properly.

Sunnyview House

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

During an assessment under our new approach

3 April 2019

During a routine inspection

28 February 2018

During a routine inspection

14 January 2016

During a routine inspection

8 November 2013

During a routine inspection

14 February 2013

During a routine inspection

3 March 2011

During a routine inspection