Archived: Sunrise of Elstree

Updated 28 February 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2014 and to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications. Statutory notifications include information about important events which the provider is required to send us. We also reviewed the provider information return (PIR) submitted to us. This is information that the provider is required to send to us, which gives us some key information about the service and tells us what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.

The inspection was unannounced and carried out by two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is someone who has used this type of service or supported a relative who has used this type of service.

During the inspection we spoke with 14 people who used the service, three relatives, 10 staff members and the registered manager. We received information from service commissioners and health and social care professionals. We viewed information relating to five people’s care and support. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the service.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us due to their complex health needs.

Updated 28 February 2018

This inspection was carried out on 9 January 2018 and was unannounced. The service had previously been rated as Good. However, the service had recently undergone a change to their registration which meant that this was the first inspection under the current registration. At this inspection we found that they were meeting all the standards.

Sunrise of Elstree provides accommodation for up to 81 older people some of whom live with dementia. The home is not registered to provide nursing care. At the time of the inspection there were 74 people living there.

The service had a manager who was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was well known throughout the home and proactive in their approach. At the service the registered manager uses the title Assisted Living Coordinator.

There were systems in place that monitored the quality of the service, resolved issues and strived for continuous improvement. Staff felt engaged and empowered working at the service. We found the ethos in the service was ‘People first’. We found there were very few complaints but these were responded to appropriately.

People received personalised care that met their needs and respected their preferences. Care plans gave staff clear guidance and staff followed these plans. People enjoyed activities that reflected their hobbies, interests and lives. People were supported with care and kindness at the end of their life.

People were supported by staff who knew how to promote safety and recognise abuse. Individual risks were assessed but these did not stop people living a full life. People’s medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff who were recruited through a robust process. We also found that infection control was well managed.

People were supported by staff who were trained and supported. People were given choice and supported in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.

People enjoyed a variety of food, a pleasant dining experience and their nutritional needs were met.

People had regular access to health care professionals. We found that the design and layout of the building met people’s needs and promoted dignity. The service refers to the units in the home as neighbourhoods and the unit managers as Neighbourhood Coordinators. However, throughout this report we refer to the different areas as units and unit managers.

People were treated with dignity, respect and kindness and were involved in decisions about their care. People told us that they made friendships and felt happy at the service.

Confidentiality was promoted through the management of records and how staff spoke with people.