Inspection on 22/08/06 for 12 Alfred Street

This inspection was carried out on 22nd August 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 8 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

12 Alfred Street 15/08/07

Similar services:

2 Perhaver Park

The Vicarage

St George`s

5 Seafield Road

Credence House

Radfords

Honeybourne House

32 Beaumont Way

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/07/2008.

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 12 Alfred Street Gloucester Gloucestershire GL1 4DF Lead Inspector Mr Paul Chapman Key Unannounced Inspection 22nd August 2006 09:00 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service 12 Alfred Street Address Gloucester Gloucestershire GL1 4DF Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 01452 550452 www.holmleigh-care.co.uk Holmleigh Care Homes Ltd Mrs Jean Susan Wall Care Home 2 Category(ies) of Learning disability (2) registration, with number of places 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 04/11/05 Brief Description of the Service: The property is a two bedroom terraced house in Gloucester. To the rear of the property is a good-sized garden that is well maintained. The accommodation comprises of a separate lounge and dining room with the kitchen to the rear of the property. On the first floor are two good-sized bedrooms. Currently the service is provided for two men with mild learning and physical disabilities. The home is staffed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with a minimum of one staff member being on duty at all times. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was a key inspection. It was completed over a period of 4.5 hours on Monday 21st August 2006 and was unannounced. Information received by the CSCI since the previous inspection was taken into account when planning the inspection. The purpose of the inspection was to assess whether peoples needs were being met appropriately with a particular regard for ensuring that the outcomes for them were good. To achieve this people living at the home were asked for their opinions and observations of daily living and the care provided were noted. In addition to this the premises were inspected as well as the written documentation relating care, protection and the ongoing management of the home. Staff on duty were spoken with and observed going about their duties. The principle method used to gather evidence was case tracking. This involves examining the care notes and other related documents for a select number of people living at the home. This is followed up by talking to them or their relatives/representatives, or observing them. This provides a useful, in depth insight as to how people’s needs are being met from more than one source of evidence. At this inspection both of the people living at the home were case tracked. As no relatives or representatives were at the home the senior support worker was asked for the names and addresses of family members and other professionals involved in the care of people in the home. These had not been supplied by the time this report was published. The CSCI will send surveys to these people and their comments will be taken into account at the next inspection. Fees range from £198.60 to £210.94 What the service does well: When visiting the home you enter into a hallway with the staircase to the first floor in front of you, the dining room first on your left followed by the door to the lounge further down the hall. The hall is light and airy and nicely decorated. The communal areas (lounge and dining room) are decorated to a good standard with comfortable furnishings. Both of the people living at the home said that they “enjoyed living at the home”. Both of the bedrooms were seen during the inspection, and each reflected the persons’ hobbies and interests. Both people commented that they “liked their bedrooms” Both of the people living at the home spoke to the inspector during the visit. They explained what hobbies and interests they had and the activities they are involved in both in and outside the home. Comments included “I enjoy helping with the cooking”, “I like being able to go into Gloucester alone”. Both people confirmed that the activities recorded in their notes had been happening, these 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 included visits to the pub to play darts and pool, bowling, the cinema, and regular takeaways. Both people attend college during term time and said that they enjoy their courses. Good records are kept of activities. Interactions between the staff and people living at the home were observed and seen to be respectful and both people spoken with said that the “staff were nice”. The senior support worker on duty had a good knowledge of total communication that enabled them to communicate effectively with one person and enabled the inspector to talk to them. The outcomes for the people living at the home appear to be good. All of the comments received during the inspection were positive about lifestyles, staff support and the environment in which people live. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The people living at the home should be offered new contracts between them and the new service provider. Personal files held detailed information on each person, but their care plans need to be SMART (Specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, timeconstrained). The staff must also ensure that care plans are reviewed within the accepted timescales. Risk assessments completed by staff should “enable people” to complete activities whilst minimising potential risks. Staff must ensure that peoples identified needs are met. The home must ensure that medication administration is managed to meet the criteria of the regulations. The new complaints procedure must be given to each of the people living in the home. The home must develop systems to monitor the quality of the service provided. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Fire safety equipment must be checked as required by the regulations. Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 5 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Contracts are not up to date and this may affect the rights of the people living at the home. EVIDENCE: There have been no new admissions to the home since the previous inspection. It is impossible to comment on the effectiveness of the home’s admission policy, as it has not been used. Since the previous inspection the home has been taken over by Holmleigh Care. The written contracts for each of the people living at the home were signed by them. It was noted however that the contract was between the person and the previous care provider, not the current one. This should be addressed. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7, 9 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The majority of people’s needs are being met by the staff but the documentary evidence available does not support this. People are able to make decisions about their lifestyles and are therefore empowered. Risk assessments are poor and this either restricts what a person can do or puts them at unnecessary risks. EVIDENCE: Personal files provide a substantial amount of information about each of the people living at the home. Care plans were divided into eleven parts: - Maintaining a safe environment, behaviour, physical and mental health, communication, sleeping, mobility, eating and drinking, self help skills, activities, family and long term goals. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Both people stated that they “liked living at the home”. Care plans and personal files were examined and highlighted a number of shortfalls. • • • • • One person’s care plans had not been reviewed in over 12 months. Goals were not specific. The terminology used by staff in these documents was poor and unprofessional in places. One person’s notes made reference to a “consistent structured care plan” but it was not present in the person’s file. Needs had been highlighted, e.g. use of speech therapy, but no evidence was available confirm that had been achieved. The person who this relates to confirmed that they had not met with a speech therapist, but would like to in the future. Risk assessments were of poor quality. They were not focused, did not minimise risks and in one case two contradicted each other. • People living at the home gave examples of making their own decisions. There were many clear examples of them deciding what activities they wished to take part in and what they wished to eat. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16, 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People live varied and fulfilling lifestyles that they choose for themselves. EVIDENCE: Both of the people living at the home spoke about their leisure activities. One person spoke about learning how to ride their bicycle to college and staff explained how this had been achieved. Information from staff showed that this process had been well organised with a professional tutor being employed to teach the person about road safety and cycling. Unfortunately this had not been recorded thoroughly and it was difficult to see the step-by-step process followed. (Standard 9 details shortfalls relating to risk assessment). They explained that they would like to do some work experience and that this was to be organised via the college. Since moving into the home they have been able to do a lot more for themselves independently. This now includes being able to go into Gloucester alone. They stated that the food at the home was good, and 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 that he and the other person living at the home chose what they wanted to eat, and were supported by staff to go out shopping to purchase the ingredients. The person stated that although he does not cook the meals himself he enjoys helping the staff to prepare the meals. In addition to the meals prepared in the home take-aways are also purchased regularly. The person said that they take part in numerous activities outside the home, and this was supported by an activity sheet seen during the site visit. Activities completed included going to the cinema, bowling and going to the pub. The person’s interests included darts, pool and model making and they showed the inspector their collection of models they had built. Holidays had been taken with one holiday to Butlins and another to Ironbridge with the college. The other person living at the home is of a similar age and shares some similar interests. They explained that they enjoy going to the pub, bowling and the cinema in addition to playing golf, watching speedway and visiting Alton Towers. They showed the inspector their collection of DVDs and their Harley Davidson and custom chopper motorcycle models. The person does not attend college during the day but does attend an evening class where they are studying art. The person’s drawings were of a really high standard and he is obviously a very talented artist. Each person has an activity sheet that details what they are doing for the week in advance. As part of this it details what chores they are expected to do. This may include doing the hovering, washing up and general cleaning. This is recognised as a good practice and provides substantial evidence of what people doing. Both people stated that they really enjoyed living at the home and that the staff were nice. The menus seen showed that people are offered a healthy and nutritious diet. Speaking with the two people they both agreed that they chose what they wished for their meals and that the food was nice. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19, 20 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Medication administration shortfalls increase the chances of people being put at risk. People’s health needs are not being met. EVIDENCE: People that live at the home do not require any physical support with their personal care. The only support given by the staff is in the form of prompts/reminders. When examining a personal file the care plan identified that a goal was to seek the input of a speech and language therapist. No evidence confirming whether this had been done was available in the person’s file, but when talking to them later they said it had not been organised. They said that they would still like to see one. Before this site visit was completed the inspector received an anonymous phone call stating that an untrained member of staff was administering medication. The inspector informed the provider of this. The senior support 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 worker was open and honest about this situation explaining that it had happened and that as soon as they realised the mistake it was rectified. Evidence seen on recording sheets during the site visit showed that the untrained staff member had administered medication for a period of nine days. Since then whenever the member of staff has been on duty a trained staff member has visited the home to administer any required medication. The inspector believes this was a genuine oversight by the home, but they must ensure that it is not repeated in the future. Medication administration records were examined and showed that stocks were not being checked as they entered the premises, and there was no record or facility to record medication being returned to the pharmacist. In addition to this topical creams were not labelled with the date they were opened. These 3 areas must be addressed. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22, 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People are able to make complaints if they are unhappy about something in the home. The appropriate complaints procedure being supplied to the home will ensure that the correct procedures are in place to protect people. Staff understanding of abuse and the procedure to be followed help to minimise the potential risk to vulnerable adults. EVIDENCE: As mentioned previously in this report the home has been taken over by Holmleigh Care. The complaints procedure present in personal files was that of the previous provider and therefore not accurate. The new provider must ensure that this is addressed and each person is issued with a new complaints procedure. Both people stated they could make a complaint, and would speak to staff if they were unhappy about something. One person stated that they had made a complaint about a staff member in the past and it had been resolved to their satisfaction. Staff were asked to explain what they would do if they suspected that someone was being abused, or someone made a disclosure to them. The explanations given were detailed and ensured that the person was not put risk. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The new member of staff had recently completed training in protection of vulnerable adults. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 25, 26, 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The bedrooms seen during the day were decorated to a good standard and reflected the interests of the people that lived in them. EVIDENCE: The lounge and dining room were decorated to a good standard. One of the people living at the home explained that they had painted the kitchen “ages ago”. The paintwork in the kitchen is now looking a little tired and grubby. This must be addressed. In addition to this the kitchen cupboards and work surfaces are worn and have seen better days. The provider should include replacing the kitchen as part of the planned maintenance schedule. Both bedrooms were seen during the day with the inspector being accompanied by the owner of the room on both occasions. Both people said how much they liked their bedrooms. The home was clean and hygienic. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34, 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Staff receive training in mandatory as well needs led topics to minimise risks and meet specific and changing needs. EVIDENCE: The staffing rota showed that the home is staffed 24hours a day, 7 days a week. There is usually 1 member of staff on duty at all times although this number increases form time to time when required. Staff recruitment records were not examined on this occasion and the inspector intends to meet with the group manager to examine these records in the near future. Talking with the home’s newest staff member they explained that they have completed their Learning Disability Award Framework Foundation course. And training in abuse awareness, fire safety, food hygiene and first aid. They explained that are currently completing medication administration training. The senior support worker explained that they had completed their induction course, medication administration, food hygiene, health and safety and a fire 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 safety course. In addition to this they would also be starting their NVQ in the near future. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39, 42 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Quality assurance documentation is limited making it impossible to confirm what actions have been taken to monitor quality. People living at the home are being put at risk due to the fire alarm/smoke sensors not being checked regularly. EVIDENCE: In the month before this inspection the registered manager resigned. The organisation has informed the CSCI that they have recruited a person to this post and the CSCI are expecting their application to become a registered manager. At the time of this site visit the home was being overseen by the senior support worker. Since the home has been taken over by Holmleigh Care they have supplied a procedures manual for staff to follow. Review of care plans and risk 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 assessments were poor and out of date in some cases. People living in the home meet regularly to discuss issues and decide on activities they would like to take part in. Although the quality assurance recording must be improved both of the people at the home were really positive about living there and the support they receive from the staff. Examination of various records provided the following information: • Fridge/freezer temperatures were recorded, some gaps were evident. It is recommended that the safe parameters and corrective actions be added to these forms. • Portable Appliance Testing was completed in July 2006. • Fire equipment has been serviced by a qualified engineer in November 2005. Examination of the records for staff checking the equipment identified that they are not being checked regularly. And at the time of the site visit both of the smoke alarms LED lights were flashing red. The inspector understands that this is due to the “back up” battery needing to be replaced. Speaking with staff they were unaware of when they had been replaced last. The home must ensure that they replace the “back up” battery at regular intervals. Currently the COSHH cupboard is under the sink in the kitchen. This does not have a lock on it as people living at the home access it regularly when completing chores around the home. The staff should complete a risk assessment for this practice. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 2 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 3 26 3 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 X 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 3 X 1 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 2 2 X 2 X 2 X X 1 X 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. 2. Standard YA5 YA6 Regulation 5 15 Requirement The service provider must issue people at the home with new contracts. Care plans must be developed to meet people’s needs. These must be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timeconstrained. Risk assessments must be completed that enable people to take part in activities and minimise the potential risks to them. The staff must ensure that where a person has a physical need that it is addressed. Staff must ensure that medication administration is managed correctly. • Medication must be stock checked on entering the premises. • Any medication to be returned to the pharmacist must be recorded. • All creams should be labelled with the date they are opened. People living at the home should DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 06/10/06 27/10/06 3. YA9 13(4) c 06/10/06 4. 5. YA19 YA20 12(b) 13(2) 27/10/06 06/10/06 6. YA22 22 06/10/06 Page 25 12 Alfred Street Version 5.2 7. 8. YA39 YA42 24 23(4) be issued with a copy of the new complaints procedure. The home must develop a 10/11/06 system for monitoring the quality of the service. The provider must ensure that 06/10/06 staff complete the regular checks of the fire equipment. This must include a timetable for replacing the “back up” battery in each smoke sensor. RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. 2. Refer to Standard YA42 YA42 Good Practice Recommendations The manager could add the safe parameters and corrective actions for fridge and freezer temperatures. The manager should complete a risk assessment for the storage of COSHH under the sink in an unlocked cupboard. 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Gloucester Office Unit 1210 Lansdowne Court Gloucester Business Park Brockworth Gloucester, GL3 4AB National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI 12 Alfred Street DS0000067435.V309307.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!