Inspection on 12/07/06 for Albert House

This inspection was carried out on 12th July 2006.

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

Albert House 02/02/06

Albert House 15/11/04

Albert House 21/05/04

Similar services:

The Vicarage

Fairfields Country Rest Home

7 Hyde Road

5 Seafield Road

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Albert House 19 Albert Road Weston Super Mare North Somerset BS23 1ES Lead Inspector Barbara Ludlow Key Unannounced Inspection 12th July 2006 09:30 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 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.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. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Albert House Address 19 Albert Road Weston Super Mare North Somerset BS23 1ES 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) 01934 622869 01934 613807 www.yeomancare.co.uk Yeoman Care Limited Mrs Catherine Blanche Barron Care Home 20 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (20) of places Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. May accommodate 20 persons aged 50 years and over who require nursing care of whom up to 3 residents may be 65 years and over in need of personal care only. Staffing Notice dated 06/10/1999 applies. Manager must be a RN on parts 1 or 12 of the NMC register. 2nd February 2006 2. 3. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Albert House is run by Yeoman Care Ltd. The Responsible Individual for the company is Mr W. Esland, and the registered manager is Mrs C Barron. The home provides nursing care to up to 20 patients over the age of 50 whose needs include sickness, injury and infirmity. The home may provide personal care for up to 3 people over the age of 65. The total number of people who may be in residence at any one time is 20.The home is set near the seafront in a quiet residential area. Shops and other community facilities are nearby and the main town centre is a short journey away. The premises are comfortably furnished and designed to create a relaxing homely atmosphere. There is a sheltered and private back garden. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced key standard inspection was commenced on 12th July 2006 but not completed as the Registered Manager was on holiday. An appointment was made to complete the homes inspection visit on 1st August 2006. The visits to Albert House to make this key inspection were very positive the inspection was well received, staff were helpful and friendly. Mr Esland was present on day one and a tour of the premises was made (not all individual accommodation was seen). Mr Esland outlined his proposals to develop the home. The nurse in charge was spoken with and a number of service users were seen and spoken with and care records were sampled. At the second visit the Registered Manager was present and time was taken to review the requirements made at the last inspection and to introduce the new inspection process. Mr Esland was available throughout the day to assist with the inspection process. Staff were seen and heard to be polite, kind and attentive with service users when carrying out their duties at the home. Lunch was served and the mealtime was observed. The inspector was invited to eat with the manager, sampling the menu for the day. All service users were seen and many were spoken with. Two visitors were seen and spoken with during the second inspection day; praise was heard for the care and support given at the home. Positive feedback was heard from service users about the care and living at Albert House. Records were sampled for the homes maintenance, finances and staff recruitment. Care plans were sampled as part of the case tracking process. Feedback was given to Mrs Barron and Mr Esland at the conclusion of the day. Following the first inspection day Mr Esland notified CSCI of preventative environmental safety work undertaken after the visit. What the service does well: The proprietor is committed to delivering a good service and is responsive to inspection findings, Mr Esland is keen to meet the National Minimum Standards and achieve outcomes that are in the best interests of the service users. Staff are motivated and are well supported by the management team. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Service users confirmed that they are well cared for. Praise was heard for the catering, both for the variety and the quality of food offered. The kitchen was refitted last year this included the fitting of an oven that steam cooks to retain nutrient values and flavours. The dishwasher has a full sterilisation process. The kitchen walls have been lined and the kitchen was fitted with stainless steel tables to ensure full and easy cleaning, a further anti infection control measure. Staff are encouraged to undertake NVQ training. Attention had been paid to assist service users with hearing deficits, two specials aids were seen in use that were of much benefit to the service users and staff to aid communication. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Staff supervision and annual appraisal must be carried out. A less formal approach via a management log was suggested to initiate the process and introduce the concept into the homes management processes. Annual appraisal should be carried out on a formal basis and could form in part a skills audit. Further to this an action plan is required at this inspection from the Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Registered Manager, to determine how staff development and supervision fit into the homes Quality Assurance and business planning. There are plans to implement changes to the homes fire alarm system, in the interim a review of the signage is recommended to ensure it is compliant to the most recent standard with fire exits signs bearing ‘the running man’. 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. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2,3,4,5. Standard 6 does not apply. The outcome for this area was good. There is sufficient information for service users and their families to access prior to admission. Assessment is carried out to ensure the service users needs can be met at the home. EVIDENCE: The inspector was informed that prospective service users are invited to come and look around the home. With enquiries an initial enquiry form is completed and a brochure is sent out. The Counsel and Care publication, ‘Care Home Guide’ is also available at the home. Pre admission assessment is carried out to ensure that the home will be able to meet the service users determined care needs. Care plans sampled demonstrated good practice in the level of recorded information seen on file. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 The fee level ranges from £494.58, which is the North Somerset Social Services fee rate for nursing care. The North Somerset nursing fee rate is set and includes the Registered Nurse Care Contribution (RNCC) at middle band. Privately funded clients have the RNCC, which is paid directly to the home, deducted at middle band from their weekly fee payable. This was clearly demonstrated on the documentation and in discussion at the inspection. Service user feedback forms received by CSCI indicated that no contracts had been issued to the sample chosen. Mr Esland confirmed that service user contracts are issued where service users are privately funded, and that to avoid confusion it had been previously agreed with Social Services in North Somerset that no other documentation was necessary. A copy of the local authority agreement should be available in line with regulation 5(3), the inspector was aware that this is usually available and on file; the service user feedback indicated unanimously ‘no’ to having a contract. It is helpful to prospective service users / new residents to be aware of the homes Contract / Terms and Conditions of residence, these could be added to the updated Service User Guide for information purposes. An updating of the Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide is recommended at this inspection. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10 The outcome for this area was good. Care plans were sampled; these demonstrated good care planning and review for the individual service users. Service users were observed to be treated in a friendly and respectful way. Medications management was satisfactory; care must be taken to sign all hand written entries on the MAR charts. EVIDENCE: The inspector observed and heard staff and service user interactions; all were friendly, caring and appropriate. Service users and visitors were complimentary about the care and service delivered at Albert House. The care plans indicated appropriate nursing care practice and intervention. The home has a good relationship with the community health care services. Two GP’s from a local practice alternately visit the home every two weeks to check on any service users that are ill and to review medication if required. Feedback to CSCI from the local G.P practice was all positive. There were no service users reported to have pressure sores. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Staff rotas were sent to CSCI with the pre inspection information; these demonstrated that there is a registered nurse on duty at all times. The home currently offers one place for adaptation training for overseas nurses. At the inspection there was one overseas adaptation nurse with a training day each week in a supernumerary capacity. A second ex student having completed their course was working as an extra carer whilst awaiting their NMC registration PIN number. On day one of the inspection the medication administration sheets were examined. Some hand written entries were signed, however 5 hand written entries had no signature. NB. A signature by a second competent other is recommended as good practice by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (The Administration and Control of Medicines in Care Homes and Children’s Services, page 7) The home has a specialist pharmaceutical fridge with an integral digital temperature display on the front of the fridge; the temperature is recorded daily and was found to held within the normal range of 2-8 degrees Celsius. Controlled medication storage was satisfactory. Temazepam was appropriately stored and records were made to monitor the stock. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14,15 The outcome for this area was good. More able service users have control over their daily lives and spend their time as they choose. The less able receive good personal care but may require more social care. The feedback from service users indicated their perception that staff are always busy. The inspector observed that much of the interaction was task orientated. The food received high praise from the service users and the menu sampled was nicely presented, tasty and nutritious. EVIDENCE: The home has a relaxed friendly atmosphere. The layout of the separate sitting rooms allows quiet activity such as reading to be peaceful and uninterrupted. Up to three service users were seen to be reading newspapers and books in one lounge during the day, the other ground floor lounge is used more for television viewing, news and current affairs were the choice when the inspector was present. Service users who were spoken with during this time were interested and content with their viewing. The upstairs lounge had a busy ambience with staff in attendance and the television on, with children’s programmes the chosen channel. There are no Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 dedicated activities staff. It was unclear whether or not the less able service users had sufficient social stimulation. Commendable effort is made to improve communication with the aid of special ‘loops’ for service users that were hearing impaired. These were seen to be used and to be effective. Lighting throughout the house is good. To meet the needs of some service users additional attention has been paid to enhance the lighting in one lounge for service users with poor eyesight. Visitors were seen and spoken with, one expressed appreciation for the care of their spouse and for the kindness and support given at the home. Visitors asked confirmed that they are made welcome at Albert House. The home has a visitor’s book for fire safety and security purposes and is used. The front door is kept locked for the safety of one service user who is at risk of leaving the home unaccompanied; the effect of this practice was not seen to impact on the liberty of other service users at the home. Service users generally looked well kempt, drinks and dietary needs were catered for. One service user who was frail on admission was noted to have settled and had made a significant health gain. This person even looked much better in the short time between inspection visits. During the tour of the premises on the first visit, the kitchen was seen. Newly refurbished last year, the kitchen was very clean and well maintained. Records were in order for fridge and freezer temperatures and cleaning. Mr Esland had invested in a special oven, which cleverly cooks food to retain flavour and nutritional value and is efficient in catering time. On the second visit, lunch was served and the mealtime observed. The inspector was invited to eat with the manager and sample the main menu for the day, which was cottage pie, peas, carrots, and cauliflower. This meal was nicely presented, fresh vegetables were used, and it was well prepared and delicious. Service user and visitor feedback praised highly the quality and variety of the menu offered at Albert House. Comment included, ‘excellent, home cooked food’, good variety’ and ‘good food’. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.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 inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16,18 The outcome for this area was good. The home has a complaints policy, there have been no complaints made to CSCI or the home. Service users asked felt they could raise any concerns with the management. Recruitment processes must include a POVA first before work in the home commences, see NMS 29 EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints policy, there have been no complaints made to CSCI or the home. Service user feedback indicated that all respondents would know who to speak with if unhappy. Staff are well managed and experienced carers, there is a good level of supervised working to promote good care practices and prevent abuse. The home has policies and procedures for good practice and has induction and ongoing staff training to maintain good standards in care practices. All staff employed at the home had a CRB / POVA check, however in two cases these had arrived after the employee had commenced work at the home. Although there were very good reasons offered for this happening and sufficient other recruitment checks were recorded, it is unacceptable practice and must not reoccur. See NMS 29. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 20, 22, 26 The outcome for this area is good; a recommendation is made for fire signage. The home was clean and tidy, environmental repairs following the last inspection had been met. Specialist equipment was seen in use. Infection control was generally well managed. There is a comfortable homely atmosphere. EVIDENCE: A tour of the premises was made with the proprietor, communal rooms were seen and bedrooms were sampled. Individual bedrooms can be personalised. Since the last inspection attention had been paid to maintenance and servicing. The inspector was able to view the repairs made to meet requirements applied the last inspection report. There are plans to develop the home and this will include the upgrading of the homes fire alarm system. The inspector noted that the latest style of fire Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 signage, ‘running man’ indicating the fire exits was not in evidence. The fire signage should be brought up to date, this is recommended. Infection control is generally well managed. Gloves and aprons were available for staff to use and the home was clean and hygienic. The home has an efficient laundry system with sluice cycle facility and ozone processing on the washing machines to improve infection control. No concerns were raised with the inspector about the care of personal clothing or the laundry process. One sluice facility that was not accessible was cleared after the first visit; also where a waste bin was identified that in preference should be a foot operated flip top style, this was replaced. The sluice facilities remain as sluice hopper style. The proprietor discussed introducing a sluice disinfection cycle machine into the planned extension to the home. This would be good infection control practice. Advice from the PCT Infection Control Nurse or the local Health Protection Unit staff should be sought early in the planning stages. The installation of a disinfection cycle bedpan and urine bottle washer remains as an ongoing good practice recommendation for this Nursing Home. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29,30 The outcome for this area is adequate. Sufficient staff were seen on duty and care needs were met. Care staff also provide activities and social care, this should be kept under review to ensure it remains adequate. The home has a stable staff team and there is training and updating provided. Relationships between staff and service users were observed to be caring and trusting. EVIDENCE: Duty rotas were forwarded to CSCI for analysis prior to the inspection. These demonstrated a sufficient skill mix of staff scheduled to work. There is a registered nurse on duty at all times. On the inspection days there were sufficient staff on duty. The home has bank staff, to help out when required. Staff were very busy during the inspection visits. This was also the perception of a service user in response to a question ‘Do staff listen and act on what you say?’ The home has dedicated maintenance, cleaning and catering staff. There are no dedicated activities staff, social care is provided by the care staff. This is not always the best solution to meeting the needs of those who are less able and who may require more time for one to one attention that is not care Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 task orientated. The activities should be kept under review and take into account staff knowledge, skills and abilities to deliver a social care programme for all service users including the less able. Staff spoken with confirmed that they have training and updating in care skills and knowledge such as fire, manual handling and first aid. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,32,34,35,37,38 The outcome for this area is good. The home runs smoothly and is well supported by the management. Service users best interests are considered and records and finances are well managed. Maintenance was generally up to date. EVIDENCE: The inspection took place over two days. The Registered Manager Mrs C Barron, who is an experienced Registered General Nurse, was on duty on second day of the inspection visits. Mrs Barron and Mr Esland gave a significant period of time to the inspection process. Discussion was around the development of the home and processes to comply with the National Minimum Standards. Mrs C Barron holds the NVQ level 4 Registered Managers Award and has been in post for four years at Albert House. Mrs Barron has supernumerary Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 management time and works some shifts as the nurse in charge. As such she is in touch with the care delivery and has working supervision of staff. An open management style was observed during the inspection period. Mr Esland is committed to the home and service delivery giving management support on a regular basis at the home and overseeing the business. Formal staff supervision is not recorded. As the home develops this will provide a useful management tool for work planning and developing team working. Annual appraisal is not carried out but as with supervision must be initiated. It is required that supervision be planned and developed over the next three months becoming established as management practice within six months. This was discussed with the Registered Manager at the inspection and agreed as a timely solution to the implementation of formal recorded staff supervision and appraisal. Records sampled: fire equipment safety checks, including the weekly alarm checks, annual servicing of the alarm and fire extinguishers and other safety equipment. These were satisfactory. Monthly in house emergency lighting test records were not seen, this is the frequency recommended in the published guidance ‘Fire Safety - An Employers Guide’ which is the guide for Care Homes recommended by the Fire Services. Gas safety was certified; the central heating had been serviced in October 2005. Portable Appliance Testing (PAT) was up to date, June.06 The pre inspection questionnaire information stated that the mains installation had also been checked in June 06. The home has waste collection contracts. The hoists and the lift had been serviced in June 06. One bath aid required attention to its rubber ferrules, which had rotted. This was brought to the attention of Mr Esland on visit day one. Wardrobes were noted to be unsecured at the first visit; Mr Esland reported that these had all been secured prior to the second visit to the home. Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.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 3 3 3 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 3 X 3 X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 3 X 3 3 2 3 2 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.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 OP36 OP29 Regulation 18(2) 19(1)(b) (i) 23(2)(c) 13(2) Requirement Staff supervision and appraisal must be introduced and fully implemented within six months. Staff must not start work in the home until a CRB disclosure or PoVA First check have been obtained. One identified bath aid must be repaired. Hand transcribed entries on Medication Administration records must be signed. Timescale for action 28/11/06 28/08/06 3 4 OP38 OP9 28/08/06 28/08/06 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 OP26 Good Practice Recommendations Up to date Fire exit signage (‘running man’) should be used in line with the Fire Safety in Care Homes guidance. A sluice disinfection cycle bedpan / bottle washer installation should be considered with any improvements or development of the premises to upgrade the infection control measures at the home. A review of care staff duties and activities provision should be made to ensure that there is the best social care available for the less able. The homes Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide should be updated and a copy forwarded to CSCI. 3. 4. OP12 OP1 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Somerset Records Management Unit Ground Floor Riverside Chambers Castle Street Taunton TA1 4AL 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 Albert House DS0000020267.V299188.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!