Inspection on 14/12/05 for 33 Station Road

This inspection was carried out on 14th December 2005.

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 found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

33 Station Road 13/10/06

33 Station Road 11/07/05

33 Station Road 23/02/05

33 Station Road 04/08/04

Similar services:

Beech Lodge

8 Thorndale Road (Homefield College)

Hunter`s Lodge

Hillside

Applegarth

122 Scorer Street

Jubilee Villa Care Home

Thornham Grove

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Station Road (33) Brimington Chesterfield Derbyshire S43 1JU Lead Inspector Jill Wells Unannounced Inspection 14th December 2005 10:30 Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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 Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Station Road (33) Address Brimington Chesterfield Derbyshire S43 1JU (01246) 205801 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) None United Response Mrs Janice Ashmore Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Learning disability (6) registration, with number of places Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 11th July 2005 Brief Description of the Service: 33 Station Road is a large semi detached house congruent with the surrounding residential area and close to local amenities. There is a regular bus route to Chesterfield town centre. The home has a large and well-maintained garden area that is accessible for residents. Accommodation comprises of 6 single bedrooms and there are domestic style lounge and dining areas. The home is satisfactorily resourced with bathroom and toilet facilities. Care programmes are developed with each resident and external specialist support obtained as required. The advanced age of several of the residents is assessed and necessary aids and adaptations provided. A passenger lift is also provided. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection took place over a 3.5 hour period. During this time residents and staff were spoken with. The manager was present for some of the inspection. The tour of the building took place assisted by a resident and two resident showed the inspectors their bedroom. Records were inspected including residents’ files. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The hallway stairs and landing had been redecorated since the last inspection visit. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 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. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 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 Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 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): 1 Prospective service users have the information that they need in order to make an informed decision about the home. EVIDENCE: There was a statement of purpose and service user guide available at the home for residents and prospective residents. These documents were detailed, in pictorial formats and large print. The information was clear and specific. This information would assist prospective service users to make a decision concerning whether the home could meet their needs. It was stated that residents are given a copy of these documents and staff go through the information with them. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 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, 8, 10. The quality of support plans were excellent encouraging independence and supporting residents to develop their skills and strengths. Staff supported and encouraged residents to make decisions about their own lives and to be involved in the daily life of the home. EVIDENCE: Two residents’ support plans were seen. These were of a high standard, very detailed and person centred. Examples of the detail within the plans included information on how each resident liked to celebrate Christmas, birthdays and achievements. Each resident was also asked their preferences concerning male and female workers in various circumstances. There were details such as what makes each person nervous, afraid or sad. There was also information about anything that a resident would really want to do and havent yet been able to. These were excellent examples of supporting independence and individuality. Three residents were spoken with during the inspection visit. Others were introduced although several residents were poorly at the time of the inspection visit. It was evident from discussions with residents that they felt that this was their home and that they were involved in all aspects of life in the home. An example was a resident that invited the inspector to stay for lunch. The resident obviously felt quite confident to tell the inspector that, you can stay. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 Residents were also seen making drinks for staff as well as staff making drinks for residents, which indicated that independence as well as a sense of home life was promoted. At the time of the inspection staff were doing the weekly shop. They had taken a resident with them to help choose the food and to assist. Although residents meetings had taken place, the manager explained that consultation worked better on an informal basis at the home. Any residents that wish to were involved in selection of staff (see Standard 34) It was evident from talking with residents that they were encouraged to make decisions about their own lives with assistance as needed. An example was a resident that chose to stay at the home for Christmas rather than visit relatives as they had done previously. One resident talked about visiting a relative some distance away next year and deciding to stay in a nearby hotel supported by staff. One resident chose to visit a spiritualist Church as well as the Church of Ascension. Staff supported them to visit each church. One resident had decided not to attend the tea dance on the day of the inspection, as they were not feeling very well. Residents were encouraged to be involved with domestic activities within the home appropriate to their abilities. Again this created a sense of home life. Staff spoken with were aware of the importance of confidentiality and one resident spoken with felt happy that staff would not talk about their personal information to people that did not need to know. Confidential information concerning residents was kept in an office next to the lounge area. This door was not locked and a discussion with the manager and staff took place concerning confidentiality of this information. The manager and staff felt that the information was suitably stored as no residents entered this room and visitors would not be sat in this area on their own. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 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): 11, 12, 13, 15, 17. Residents had opportunities for personal development, were supported with any activities they wished to take part in, and were encouraged to maintain and develop personal relationships. EVIDENCE: Staff support residents to maintain and develop social skills, communication skills and independent living skills. Examples were as stated previously encouragement to undertake domestic tasks as well as promoting independence around residents own personal care considering their own abilities. Residents were encouraged to keep in contact with family and friends. One resident was supported to visit a care home that they previously lived in as they wanted contact with a friend that still lived there. Residents were treated as individuals and any support that was more appropriate on a one-toone was provided, for example personal shopping. Residents were encouraged and supported to participate in community life. Individuals were supported to cash their benefits at the post office, visit local shops, pubs and places of worship. Residents were given access to appropriate transport, which could be a local public transport, taxis or community transport. Staff support for residents outside the home was flexibly provided and was a recognised part of staff duties. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 The manager explained that staff and residents had decided not to have a main holiday this year but to have regular outings instead. Examples of outings were Disney on ice in Sheffield, Skegness and Blackpool. Residents spoken with enjoyed these outings. Residents were also offered the opportunity to attend the Zone Centre, which was a craft group, as well as the Gateway club held in the evening. They had recently had a staff and resident Christmas party held at a nearby pub. On the day of the inspection one resident was preparing to attend a tea dance at the Winding Wheel in Chesterfield. Although menus were not specifically inspected on this occasion residents spoken with were very happy with the food provided one resident said that, we can have what we want to eat and, we often go out to eat, sometimes to town. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 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. Residents received personal support in the way they prefer and require. Residents physical and health needs were met and they were protected by the homes policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. EVIDENCE: The detail in the support plans were very clear concerning individual preferences around how residents wish to receive support and assistance with their personal care. There were no set times for getting up or going to bed and it was evident from talking with staff and residents that daily routines were as flexible as possible. Records indicated that residents were consulted concerning which member of staff would be their key worker, including the gender of the worker. Records indicated that residents were supported to access their GP and other health professionals. There was supported to attend outpatient other health appointments. Several residents were poorly at the time of the inspection and were given appropriate support and TLC. Medication was stored in locked cupboards within individuals bedrooms. There were no residents that had a key to their cupboard. The money was also stored in this area. The medication administration records were checked and found to be generally in good order although there were occasional gaps where staff had not signed that they had administered or omitted the medication. The manager had picked this up during regular audits. The medication Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 administration records were handwritten. Although they were clear they had not been signed by the person completing the form or checked and countersigned by a second worker. Each resident had an individual medication file and within this file were records of medication received and returned. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 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. Residents felt confident to complain if they needed to. The homes policy and procedures protected residents from abuse. EVIDENCE: There was a clear complaints procedure that was in alternative formats. Two residents spoken with were aware of what to do if they were unhappy or wished to make a complaint. There was one complaint recorded since the last inspection. This was an informal complaint and evidenced that complaints were taken seriously. One resident said that, if I was unhappy I would tell staff and they would sort anything. Another resident said that, Ive never been unhappy here. Staff had received training around adult protection. It was stated that there had been no allegations made at the home since the last inspection. There was information concerning the adult protection procedure available for staff in the office. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 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, 27, 28, 30. The home was well decorated, comfortable and homely. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection the hallway stairs and landing had been re decorated. The hearth was due to be repaired. Two residents showed the inspector their bedroom. They were very personalised and comfortable. The laundry area was away from residents, food storage and preparation. There was a sluicing facility on the washing machine. On the day of the inspection one of the two bathrooms had been locked for safety, as there was a leak in this room. The leak was due to be repaired. Both bathrooms had a bath and one bathroom had an accessible shower. Residents have their own keys to their bedroom. Several residents chose to lock their rooms. There were two lounge areas that were both comfortable and homely. There was a toilet on the ground floor near to the lounge area. Although the home was on two floors, there was a passenger lift used by several residents that would have difficulty with the stairs. Residents were seen to use the lift independently. One resident spoken with said that they enjoyed using the lift. There was a large garden to the rear of the home. There was a pond within this area that had been attractively surrounded by railings for safety. The grounds were fully accessible with the use of ramped areas. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 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): 31, 32, 33, 34, 35. Staff had the competencies and qualities to meet the needs of residents at the home. There was a high level of commitment to training. Residents were protected by the recruitment policies of the home. EVIDENCE: Staffing levels were three staff on duty in the morning and two staff on duty in the afternoon. At the weekend there were two staff in the morning, one in the afternoon. At night there was one waking night staff. There had been several staff leave recently and this had left some staff shortages. The service had recruited new staff but were waiting for criminal record bureau checks before they could start work. Staff had done a good job in trying to cover the vacant shifts where possible. It had only been in extreme circumstances that the service had used agency staff to maintain the minimum standards. Staffing was flexible in order to meet the needs of residents. An example was a member of staff starting at 1 p.m. on the day of the inspection in order to support a resident to attend the tea dance. It was evident from observations and discussions with staff that the team worked well together and were aware of their roles and responsibilities. Staff spoken with had the competencies and qualities required to meet residents’ needs. There were very positive interactions observed between staff and residents. Staff were observed being approachable, good listeners and communicators, interested, motivated and committed. There was a high commitment to training. All relevant mandatory training was provided including fire safety on a six monthly basis, health and safety, first Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 aid, food hygiene and adult protection. All but four staff had undertaken the medication administration training. Specialist training was also provided including makaton, personal relationships and sexuality, loss and bereavement and values training for new staff. Dementia training was planned. Staff were supported to undertake NVQ Promoting Independence/Health and Social Care qualification as well as the learning disabilities award framework training. Residents were involved with the recruitment process. It was explained that any residents that wish to take part in the recruiting of new staff were encouraged and supported to do so. Individuals could be involved with the preparation and planning of the interviews as well as taking part in the actual staff interviews. Residents were paid a fee if they wished to take part. This practice should be commended. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 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, 38, 39. The manager is very experienced, competent and skilled within her role, which underpins the good practice taking place within the home. EVIDENCE: The manager was present at the time of the inspection. It was evident that she was very competent and experienced to run the home. She had the required qualifications and was clearly committed to developing her skills and knowledge. Additional training that she had undertaken included effective team management, managing for effective performance, strategic thinking, conflict resolution and managing resources. This level of commitment to personal management development should be commended. There was an open, positive and inclusive atmosphere within the home that was clearly due to the management approach. The manager communicated a clear sense of leadership and direction. It was evident that staff respected the manager’s experience and commitment. There were regular staff meetings. Minutes of these meetings showed that the manager encouraged staff to voice concerns, raise issues and offer ideas for improvements within the home. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 There were regular praise recorded in meeting minutes including a, well done for staffs hard work in covering shifts during a time of staff vacancies. At the end of the inspection, after the inspector had given very positive feedback to the manager and staff, the manager said to the two staff present, well done for all your hard work. This was clear evidence of an excellent management approach. Residents were encouraged to give feedback at any time and offer ideas as to the way that the home could be improved. Residents, and visitors including families and professionals were encouraged to complete written feedback sheets as to their findings during their visit. These feedback sheets were inspected and there were many positive comments including, I am always informed of my relatives welfare and I am always welcomed and the home is always clean and comfortable. There are good self-monitoring systems in place including audits undertaken by the manager, service manager and the area manager. Audits are undertaken around finances, medication, repairs, staffing and accidents. There was also a shift plan completed each day to remind staff of the duties they were to undertake including checks, supporting residents, reminders concerning records and domestic tasks to be undertaken when residents are in bed. The manager has set up a group called the Spire Planning Group. This group has members from this home as well as other services run by United Response. The aim of the group was to encourage residents to offer ideas as to how the services should be run and think of ways to raise money in order to help the service. There were minutes of these meetings showing the planning of parties and other activities. Two residents from the home attended this group, and one person was the chair. It was explained that although staff support residents within this group there are encouraged to run the group on their own as much as they are able and to make their own decisions. This work should be commended. Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 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 CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score 3 X X X X Standard No 22 23 Score 3 3 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 4 3 3 X 3 Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 3 X 3 3 X 3 LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 X 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score 3 3 3 4 3 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Station Road (33) Score 3 3 3 X Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 4 3 X X X X DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 22 No Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? 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 YA20 Regulation 13(2) Requirement Handwritten medication administration records must be signed by the person completing the record and should be checked and countersigned by a second person. Timescale for action 30/12/05 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Derbyshire Area Office Cardinal Square Nottingham Road Derby DE1 3QT 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 Station Road (33) DS0000020099.V273718.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 24 - 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!