Inspection on 26/03/07 for Richmond House

This inspection was carried out on 26th March 2007.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Good. 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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Richmond House 05/01/06

Richmond House 19/05/05

Richmond House 14/10/04

Richmond House 26/04/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 09/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Richmond House Mitchell Street Leigh Lancashire WN7 4UH Lead Inspector Stuart Horrocks Unannounced Inspection 26th March 2007 08:45 X10015.doc Version 1.40 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 Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.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 Older People. 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. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Richmond House Address Mitchell Street Leigh Lancashire WN7 4UH 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) 01942 682772 01942 682774 www.schealthcare.co.uk Southern Cross Healthcare Services Limited Lorraine Lamb Care Home 48 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (48), Physical disability (10) of places Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The home is registered for a maximum of 48 Service users, to include: Up to 48 service users in the category of OP (Older People) Up to 10 service users in the category of PD (Physical Disabilities under 65 years) 5th January 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Richmond House (part of Southern Cross Healthcare Services Ltd.) is a twostorey, purpose built care home located in a residential area of Leigh and is close to the main bus route. Local shops and a local pub are close by. It is pleasantly situated in its own grounds and has attractive gardens, there is ample car parking to the front of the Home. Level access to the Home is provided and a passenger lift ensures access to both floors. All bedrooms are single and have en-suite facilities. There is a dining room and lounges on each floor and each level is provided with bathrooms and toilets and there is a shower room on the ground floor. The home provides care to older people with nursing and social needs and to younger people with physical disabilities. A Service User Guide that describes the home’s services is available in the home and the staff gives other information about the home to new and prospective residents and their families verbally. A copy of the latest inspection report and the home’s Statement of Purpose are also available. As of March 2007 the weekly charge for accommodation and services is between £307:82 and £485:00. Additional charges are made for hairdressing, private chiropody services, personal magazines and newspapers and preferred toiletries. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced key inspection, which included a site visit that was started at 8:45am on the 26th March 2007. It took place over one day and it lasted for about seven and three-quarter hours. The time was split between talking to senior staff and checking records, looking around the home, watching what was happening and talking to residents and other staff. Four residents and five staff were spoken with. The home manager was not available on the day of this visit so the Deputy Manager and a Manager from another care home assisted with the inspection. A completed pre-inspection questionnaire was received along with feedback surveys from residents and relatives. Of the surveys sent out nine were returned by residents, eight by relatives and five by GP’s. The care services (case tracking) provided to three specific residents were used a basis for the process of the inspection. At a previous inspection the Home was measured against the National Minimum Standards (NMS) for Younger Adults (under 65) and Older People (over 65). After discussion with the staff it was clear that the nursing needs of the younger adults out weighed their physical needs. For example, at this time the younger adults living at the Home would not be well enough or able to take up opportunities for paid work or continue with any further education or to go out of the home unaccompanied. Therefore at this inspection only the NMS for Older People were used to assess the Homes suitability. What the service does well: The residents said that they were well looked after by the staff that they described as being “helpful”, “caring”, “friendly” and “easy to get along with”. The residents looked well cared for and the paperwork kept for each person showed that their health, personal and social care needs were being met. During the inspection the staff were seen to deal with the residents in a comfortable, caring and natural manner. The information recorded in the care files is clear and it gives good guidance about how the residents are to be cared for. Before admission to the home new residents needs are properly checked so that the home can be sure that these people can be properly cared for. The residents are treated with respect and their privacy and dignity is upheld and they are helped to make choices and decisions. The home’s visiting arrangements are flexible thus enabling the residents to have good contact with their family and friends as they please. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The home has a natural, friendly and homely feel about it with staff spending time talking to the residents. The home offers a good range of leisure activities, which help to keep the residents interested and stimulated. The staff are properly recruited and the building is well looked after and clean, and it is safe. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3. Quality in this outcome area is good. Pre-admission visits, and the initial assessment process, enable all parties, including potential residents and their relatives, to reach a decision as to whether the home will be able to meet their needs. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home does not provide intermediate (rehabilitative) care so Key Standard 6 does not apply. EVIDENCE: The care files of three residents relatively recently admitted to the home were checked for the required pre-admission needs assessment information. Such assessments were seen to be in place that demonstrated that the admission procedure was very thorough and checking of the above records showed that a full and detailed assessment of these residents care needs had been completed prior to their admission to the home. The manager or a senior member of the staff usually visits new residents either at home or in the hospital as a part of the assessment and admission process. Evidence of this was seen in the above checked files. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 From the above information the home is then able to assess whether these people’s needs can be met and a care plan and a range of other care delivery information is then put together. Where practical new residents and their families are welcome to visit the home where they can spend some time and meet the residents and the staff. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. Individual care plans and care programmes are in place, which were up to date, regularly reviewed and provided the staff with the information they needed to give a good standard of care. The home’s medication systems are satisfactory in ensuring that residents received medication as prescribed and care practices in the home ensure that the residents are treated with respect and their privacy and dignity is upheld. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The care files of the three case tracked residents were looked at. All of these files contained the details of each resident’s health, personal and social care needs. Detailed, descriptive, well written and easy to follow care plans were in place that had been regularly reviewed as required. All of the above records also showed that the residents weight is also checked regularly. The staff said that they knew each residents needs by reading the care plans, which are readily available to them. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 The required risk assessments were found to be in place in the above files and they were up to date. Talking to the residents and staff and looking at records showed that the resident’s health care needs are taken care of and that when necessary health workers such as doctors, nurses and opticians are called. The home has a number of bed safety rails in use with risk assessments completed and with the safety and condition of this equipment being regularly checked and recorded. All medicines were safely stored and lockable Controlled Drugs storage is also available and the random checking of these found the quantity kept corresponded as required with the amount recorded in the Register.. The residents’ medicines are provided in pre-filled blister packs with preprinted prescription/recording sheets also provided. These records were found to be properly completed and to be up to date. The medications supplied are checked in to the home , and medicines returned to the pharmacy are also recorded. Identification photographs of each resident are kept with the medication administration records. The home has a satisfactory medicines policy and procedure that includes guidance for the self-administration of medicines and the use of homely remedies and the medicines are given out by trained nurses. In discussion the residents said that they are given their medicines regularly and as prescribed. The home’s Philosophy of Care Statement and various other paperwork reinforced the importance of residents’ being treated with respect and dignity. Residents spoken with were all complimentary about how staff assisted them with personal care tasks and felt their privacy and dignity was respected at all times. This was also observed during the inspection. The care assistants interviewed were able to give good examples of how they promoted privacy and dignity in their daily care routines, for example knocking on bedroom doors before entering. Those residents spoken with said that the staff were “courteous”, “caring”, “lovely” and that “they (the staff) talk to us properly”. The staff were seen to have a good relationship with the residents, speaking to them in a natural, thoughtful and warm manner. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents have choice about their daily routines (e.g. getting up and going to bed times, when to eat) thus they are able to spend their time as they wish. Visitors are welcomed and the meals provided are good, offering choice and variety, and catering for special dietary needs. The activities offered within the home mean that residents have opportunities to participate in stimulating and motivating activities This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home employs two activities workers who organise and implement a programme of social and recreational activities for the residents. This programme includes events such as old time movies, passive exercises, gardening, bingo, sing a longs, board games, outings to various venues and personal sessions with individual residents. Trips out include venues such as Southport, Pennington Flash and shopping in Leigh. The activities programme is displayed, which all of the residents spoken with were aware of although some of them chose not to join in. Activities were seen to be taking place during the morning and the afternoon of the inspection with several residents taking part. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Up to date records were seen to be in place of when the residents have joined in with activities. The Home currently offers care to nine younger adults who’s nursing needs outweigh their physical abilities. A range of activities is available for these people, including for example, listening to different music, snooker and trips out. These particular residents also benefit from the planned activities both indoors and outdoors. From talking with residents and staff the inspector confirmed that visitors are welcome at any time, although preferably not at meal times. Those residents spoken with said that they “were free to see their visitors wherever they wanted to”. They described taking visitors to their bedrooms for privacy or seeing them in the main lounge. The residents said that visitors are made welcome and that they (the visitor) can have a warm drink if they so wish. Residents felt their routines were flexible and that they had choices in where to sit in lounges and dining rooms, whether or not to take part in activities, what to wear and times of rising and retiring. For those residents who may have a limited ability to make decisions and choices about their day-to-day living arrangements the staff said that they try to assist them with this by offering choices about such things as what clothing to wear, when to rise and retire and helping to choose from the menu. The residents are able to, and do bring personal items in to the home such as televisions, radios, photographs, pictures and ornaments. A requirement made at the time of the last inspection was that the home’s menu should be reviewed and changed regularly and that the menu should be displayed. Winter and summer menus have been previously available and a new menu has been recently introduced that was seen to be displayed in the dining rooms. This menu covers a four-week period and it offers a choice of good nourishing food with the main meal served at lunchtime and a lighter meal at teatime with warm food being available at both mealtimes Those residents spoken with were generally satisfied with the food provided saying that the food was “good and warm”, “you get enough to eat” and that “you can have something else” if you don’t want what is on the main menu. However a number of residents did have some doubts about a few of the “nontraditional” items that are included in the new menu. The residents also said that drinks and snacks were available at most times of the day. Meals were seen to be presented in an appealing manner with good portions offered. They are eaten in the dining rooms provided on each floor that are nicely furnished that provide a comfortable setting for the residents to dine. A further requirement made at the last inspection was that pureed meals must be presented in a manner, which is attractive and appealing in terms of Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 sensation, flavour, and appearance. This issue has been attended to with such food now being offered in separate portions that allows the residents to enjoy the different tastes, smells and textures of this cooking. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18. Quality in this outcome area is good. The home has a clear complaints system that ensures that concerns are properly dealt with and good protection of vulnerable adults guidance and staff training in this topic, makes sure that residents are protected from harm. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has a satisfactory complaints procedure that states how a complaint is to be made, who to and that an initial response will be provided within seven days with a final outcome forwarded within 28 days. The facility of making concerns known directly to the CSCI is also included in this paperwork. The complaints procedure described above is included in the Service User Guide, a copy of which was available in the home’s entrance area and copies of this procedure were widely displayed around the home. Discussion with residents showed that they were aware of the home’s complaints process and they said that they would have no hesitation in making their concerns known to the staff or the manager. Talking with staff showed that they would know what to do if a resident made a complaint. A number of staff said that if “they couldn’t sort things out at the time” then they would inform the manager about the problem. The home has a proper record for writing down complaints. One complaint has been made to the home since the last inspection in January 2006. This has been properly recorded and fully dealt with by the home. No complaint has been made to the CSCI during the above period. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 There are written procedures and policies covering whistle blowing, the none acceptance of gifts, borrowing money and legacies and the home has a full copy of the Wigan inter-agency adult protection policy and procedure. All staff receive detailed training on the protection of vulnerable adults during their induction period and NVQ Level 2 training in care has a unit on adult abuse with nine staff having competed this NVQ training. Those staff spoken with demonstrated an awareness of the different sorts of abuse and they understood what they should do if they suspected that someone was being abused. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. The standard of furnishing and fittings within Richmond House is good providing a homely, safe, well adapted, clean and comfortable environment for residents. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Richmond House is well maintained both to the inside and to the outside. Decoration, furnishing and lighting is to a good standard and is domestic in style Work undertaken recently includes the conversion of a ground floor bathroom to a shower room, the re-decoration of several bedrooms and lounges and the fitting of patio doors and an access ramp to a lounge. New dining room tables have been provided and five sets of new bedroom furniture have been ordered. As required at the last inspection the outside garden area has been provided with fencing and problems with the hot water in some residents’ bedrooms has been dealt with. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The four case-tracked resident’s bedrooms and a number of others were checked. All were found to be generally properly decorated, furnished and equipped and these residents were satisfied with the standard of the accommodation provided. A recommendation previously made was that consideration should be given to replacing the stained carpets in the corridor areas of the home. Although these carpets have since been deep cleaned and there appearance has improved some areas look rather soiled and somewhat “tired”. The inspector therefore recommends that further deliberation be given to replacing these carpets. There is good accessibility around the building with ramps, assisted baths and other equpment provided. Aids and adaptation are provided in bedrooms, bathroom and toilets. The laundry is properly equipped and information regarding the control of infection is available. The building was clean and tidy throughout and was free from any offensive odours therefore providing a pleasant place to live. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. Staffing levels are satisfactory, with staff training sufficient to make sure that the residents are provided with a good standard of care. A proper recruitment method ensures that the residents are looked after by staff that are suitable to carry out care work. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Looking at staff rotas showed that as well as employing care staff, the home also employs domestic, administrative, catering and maintenance staff. Two workers are also employed who plan and arrange recreational activities for the residents. Those staff interviewed described a settled staff team, staff moral appeared to be good with the staff saying that “there is a good atmosphere” and that “we work together well as a group” and they said that the enjoyed working at the home and providing care for the residents. The residents said that the staff are “kind”, “happy to help” and that they were “patient and considerate”. The rotas indicated that nine care staff are on duty in the morning, eight in the afternoon and evening period and five staff are on duty during the night. The above figures include two Registered General Nurses being on duty 24 hours per day. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 The staff and the deputy manager were clear in stating that in their opinion there was enough staff to meet the needs and dependency levels of the people living at the home. The home was required to have 50 of the care staff with NVQ level 2 qualifications or above by the end of 2005. Of the 22 care staff employed at the home nine have got a National Vocational Qualification at Level 2 or above with six other members of staff presently undertaking NVQ assessment at these Levels. 41 of the staff is therefore trained to the required level and when the six other staff have completed this training the required target will be met. The files of three recently employed staff were checked for the required safe recruitment information. All of these showed that the home’s recruitment systems were safe and sound. Appropriate job application forms had been completed, two written references obtained, identification had been confirmed and criminal convictions and health declarations were in place and in all instances POVA First clearances and full CRB checks had been obtained. Discussions with the staff also confirmed that they had been properly and safely recruited. Whilst talking with the inspector the staff gave examples of the training that they had been given, this included safe moving and handling, fire safety, food hygiene and first aid. A staff-training chart (a matrix) was not available therefore the inspector was not able to readily confirm that the above training had been provided. Such a chart is useful in showing what training had been completed, the date it had been done and what other training the staff need to undertake. The inspector consequently looked at a number of individual staff training records that showed that these people had received a cross section of training in the required mandatory topics. (e.g. Health and safety, fire safety, safe moving and handling, food hygiene and adult protection). The inspector therefore recommends that a staff-training chart is put together and that training provision is then assessed and any gaps addressed. As required the home uses a comprehensive training programme for the induction of new staff that complies with the recommended Scils for Care Common Induction Standards. The provision of this particular training was confirmed when talking to staff. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. 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 and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is good. The manager of the home provides leadership and support for the staff to ensure that the residents receive a satisfactory standard of care and a satisfactory accounting method is used, which protects the resident’s interests. Procedures and practices within the home promote and safeguard the health, safety and welfare of the people living and working in the home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home manager has been approved and registered by the CSCI and she has been responsible for the running of Richmond House for over six years. The manager is a Registered General Nurse and she has completed the required Registered Managers Award. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 The home is run in a satisfactory manner and the residents and the staff said that the manager operates the home in an open and inclusive way and that she is fair-minded, approachable and easy to get along with. A requirement of Standard 33 is that care homes must use quality assurance systems that are largely based on seeking the views of residents to measure their success in meeting the home’s aims and objectives. This information can then be used if necessary to bring about changes or improvements to the service. The home presently does this by the use of a survey document that asks 46 questions about the home’s services and facilities. Such a survey was last used in January 2007 that showed largely positive responses with the people surveyed being in the main satisfied with the care and services provided. The manager is reminded that when questionnaires are returned the answers must be brought together in the form of a report (to be displayed) so that both good and not so good comments are highlighted and steps can then be taken to deal with any issues. The home also holds regular meetings with the residents, their relatives and staff and in addition undertakes regular internal quality audits of the home’s systems for items such as residents care plans, standards of care and cleanliness. These audits are analysed with necessary action taken. A number of survey questionnaires were sent out by the CSCI to the residents, relatives and health workers (GP’s, district nurses etc) before the inspection. These questionnaires give these people the opportunity to comment upon various aspects of the services provided by a care home. At the time of writing this report 22 questionnaires had been returned; all of these were generally complimentary about the accommodation, the services and the care provided at Richmond House. One person said “I always find them (the staff) very nice” and another person said, “that they always receive the support and care needed”. The home holds money for a number of residents for safekeeping. This system was checked with the details found to be properly written down and with the correct amounts of money kept. This system records when money has been received and how it has been spent. Information obtained from the pre-inspection questionnaire showed that the homes fixtures, fitting and equipment is properly maintained and regularly serviced. Looking at records and conversations with staff also showed that the necessary training had been provided so that they can work safely. Further examination of paperwork showed that the safety of hot water temperatures, window opening restrictors, wheelchairs and bed safety rails is checked regularly. The home is safely maintained with fire precautions tests done weekly and the details of accidents are properly recorded. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.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 Older People 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 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 X 14 X 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 2 X 3 X X 3 Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No. Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 Standard OP33 Regulation 24 (2) Timescale for action The outcome of the residents’ 30/04/07 and relatives’ quality surveys must be brought together in the form of a report and displayed. Therefore demonstrating the home’s success in meeting its aims and objectives. Requirement 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 OP19 Good Practice Recommendations Further consideration should be given to the replacement of the soiled corridor carpets therefore improving the physical surroundings of the home. Consideration should be given to the development of a training chart (a matrix) that can be used to show any gaps in staff training and to show when training needs to be updated. Staff training provision should be checked with any shortfalls addressed so making sure that the staff are fully competent in caring for the residents. OP30 3 OP30 Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Bolton, Bury, Rochdale and Wigan Office Turton Suite Paragon Business Park Chorley New Road Horwich, Bolton BL6 6HG National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 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 Richmond House DS0000005694.V322409.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!