Inspection on 15/05/07 for Albert Residential Home

This inspection was carried out on 15th May 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

Albert Residential Home 08/05/08

Albert Residential Home 26/10/06

Albert Residential Home 15/08/05

Albert Residential Home 26/04/05

Albert Residential Home 30/09/04

Albert Residential Home 27/07/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

Old Hastings House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Albert Residential Home 40 The Warren Worcester Park Surrey KT4 7DL Lead Inspector Sarah MacLennan Unannounced Inspection 15th May 2007 10:00 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 Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.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 Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Albert Residential Home Address 40 The Warren Worcester Park Surrey KT4 7DL 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) 020 8337 2265 Mr Kanwarjit Singh Mrs N Singh Mr Kanwarjit Singh Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (2), Physical disability over 65 years of age (1) of places Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The age/age range of the persons to be accommodated will be 3 (three) over the age of 65 years. 26th October 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Albert Residential Home is a small three bed home catering for the needs of older people. It is located in a residential area of Worcester Park and is close to local amenities. There is a purpose built ramp to the front of the property for good access and off street parking. Residents also have access to a garden to the rear of the property. The fees at the home start from £350 per week. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced visit formed part of the key inspection process and took place over 4½ hours commencing at 10:00 and ending at 14:30. Sarah MacLennan, Regulation Inspector, carried out the visit. The senior carer in charge was present throughout the visit; the Registered Manager, Mr Kanwarjit Singh, was present during some of the visit. As part of the inspection process a partial tour of the premises took place. Various written records were examined, including all the service users care plans and service user assessments, the staff personnel files, staff training records, a sample of the required safety certificates, the medication storage facilities and the medication administration records. The inspector spoke to all the service users and visitors present during the visit. Prior to the site visit, comment cards were received from service users, relatives and visiting healthcare professionals. Some of the comments made are quoted within this report. The inspector would like to thank the staff and service users for their time, assistance, and hospitality during the visit. What the service does well: Service users spoken with were complimentary regarding the received in the home. This was also reflected in the comment prior to the inspection. Service user comments included; ‘it is ‘they treat everyone well’. A relative spoken to stated that ‘it’s home, not a care home’. care that they cards received wonderful’ and like a house, a Conversation with staff and service users evidenced that the service users are encouraged to be as independent as possible and to make their own choices, such interactions were observed. When asked if they received the support they required service user comments included ‘yes, I just tell them if I want something’. All interactions observed between the staff and service users were caring and respectful. Service users and relatives spoken with were complementary about the staff at the home. Comments included ‘… is very good’ and ‘… is a lovely girl’. What has improved since the last inspection? Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The homes record keeping had improved, specifically service users daily statements. They evidenced that the care plans were followed and provided details of the service users 24hr day. The homes medication storage facilities had improved, cupboards for the storage of controlled drugs had been fitted. The inspector was informed that the carpet in the hallway had been re-laid and was now glued to the floor to eliminate the potential trip hazard identified at the previous 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. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.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 Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. All Service Users had been assessed prior to admission to the home to ensure that the home can meet the service users identified needs. The home does not offer intermediate care. EVIDENCE: The inspector was advised that the registered manager carries out a preadmission assessment on all prospective service users. The three service user care plans were seen and all had a pre-admission needs assessment completed. The assessment covered all elements of physical, mental, and social needs. Service users and relatives spoken to felt they had received enough information prior to moving to the home. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Comprehensive care plans were in place. There was regular review of whether the Service users needs had changed. Policies, procedures and practices are in place to ensure the safe administration of medication. Care was seen to be provided in a respectful and sensitive manner. EVIDENCE: The three care plans and daily statements were looked at. The care plans were detailed and comprehensive, with risk assessments being completed. The service users signed them wherever possible to evidence their involvement in their care. There was regular review of whether the service users needs had changed. The service users daily statements evidenced that the care plans were followed and provided details of the service users 24hr day. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Service users spoken with were complimentary regarding the received in the home. This was also reflected in the comment prior to the inspection. Service user comments included; ‘it is ‘they treat everyone well’. A relative spoken to stated that ‘it’s home, not a care home’. care that they cards received wonderful’ and like a house, a Service users were registered with a local GP and had access to other health care services. The homes storage and recording of medication were seen and found to be in order. The home had a suitable policy for the administration of medication. Conversation with staff and service users evidenced that the service users are encouraged to be as independent as possible and to make their own choices, such interactions were observed. When asked if they received the support they required service user comments included ‘yes, I just tell them if I want something’. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The provision of activities and food are suitable for the needs of the service users. EVIDENCE: Service users spoken to stated that the provision of activities was suitable for their needs. One service user stated that they ‘enjoyed helping in the garden’. The manager stated that, due to the small size of the home a structure activities programme was not appropriate. Two of the service users stated that they preferred to sit quietly and read, rather than have entertainment organised for them. Visiting is restricted to prior to 6pm unless by prior arrangement; this is clearly documented in the service users guide. Staff support and encourage service users to maintain family links. Relatives surveyed and spoken to stated that the staff always welcomed them in the home. All service users and relatives surveyed and spoken to stated that they were happy with the food provision within the home. Service users were observed to eat lunch during the inspection. Two of the service users had their meal Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 served in a bowl; this was at their request. One service user stated that there was no choice of food, but also stated that they would not request anything different given a choice as they were happy with the food and liked it. Conversation with staff and service users evidenced that the service users are encouraged to be as independent as possible and to make their own choices, such interactions were observed. Staff were observed to treat the service users with respect and care was provided in an unobtrusive and dignified manner. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home had a simple and accessible complaints procedure; service users stated that they felt safe at the home. EVIDENCE: The home had a simple and accessible complaints procedure. There had been no complaints since the last inspection. Service users surveyed and spoken to during the inspection were aware of the complaints procedure, and felt confident about using the process. The home had adopted Surreys Multi-Agency Procedure for Vulnerable Adults; a copy of the policy was available. Staff receive training in the protection of vulnerable adults. All service users spoken with stated that they felt safe at the home. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was suitable in layout for its purpose. The home was found to be clean and tidy. EVIDENCE: The inspector toured areas of the home. It was seen to be clean, tidy and free from offensive odours. All service users spoken to stated that the home is always clean. The premises were seen to be well maintained with service users able to access all areas of the home and grounds. The inspector was informed that the carpet in the hallway had been re-laid and was now glued to the floor to eliminate the potential trip hazard. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The staffing arrangements in place on the day of the inspection were sufficient to meet the needs of the service users. EVIDENCE: Discussion with staff and service users demonstrated that the staffing numbers and skill mix were appropriate to meet the assessed needs of the service users living in the home. The staff file of the carer on duty was seen during the visit and found to contain the required information and documents specified in paragraphs 1 – 9 of Schedule 2 of The Care Homes Regulations 2001 (as amended by The Care Standards Act 2000(Establishments and Agencies) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2004). The staff training records evidenced that staff had received training in first aid, infection control, food hygiene, medication, CoSHH, vulnerable adults and dementia. Service users and relatives spoken with were complementary about the staff at the home. Comments included ‘… is very good’ and ‘… is a lovely girl’. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 All interactions observed between the staff and service users were caring and respectful. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The service users benefit from the management approach at the home, which provided an open, positive and inclusive atmosphere. EVIDENCE: The registered manager is Mr Kanwarjit Singh. He is a registered nurse who has achieved his registered managers award. All service users and relatives spoken to spoke very highly of the homes manager. The registered manager stated that there is no formal process for seeking the views of service users due to the small size of the home. The manager consults regularly with the service users and their visitor and there is an open and inclusive atmosphere evident within the home. The manager carries out Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 regular audits of the processes within the home. Samples of which were seen at inspection including the medication audit for May. Procedures are in place to safeguard the financial interests of service users. No staff members are appointees for service users. Samples of health and safety certificates were inspected and found to be in order. Staff were observed to be following appropriate health and safety practices as they went about their work. Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 3 14 3 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 Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 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 Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Commission for Social Care Inspection Oxford Office Burgner House 4630 Kingsgate Oxford Business Park South Cowley, Oxford OX4 2SU 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 Albert Residential Home DS0000013546.V339160.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 - 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!