Inspection on 22/01/07 for Alexandra House

This inspection was carried out on 22nd January 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

Alexandra House 15/12/08

Alexandra House 31/01/06

Alexandra House 01/06/05

Alexandra House 12/01/05

Alexandra House 10/06/04

Similar services:

Claremont House

Oak Ridge

Sun Court Nursing Home

Ashville House

Bilney Hall

Hill Barn

Mabbs Hall Nursing Home

Henrietta House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Alexandra House Marine Parade Dovercourt Harwich Essex CO12 3JY Lead Inspector Marion Angold Key Unannounced Inspection 22nd January 2007 11:00 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 Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Alexandra House Address Marine Parade Dovercourt Harwich Essex CO12 3JY 01255 503340 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) home.dov@mha.org.uk home.fxg@mha.org.uk Methodist Homes for the Aged Mrs Yvonne Hawkins Care Home 30 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (30) of places Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Persons of either sex, aged 65 years and over, who require care by reason of old age only (not to exceed 30 persons) 31st January 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Alexandra House is situated near the centre of Dovercourt, overlooking the seafront. The home provides care for 30 elderly people over the age of 65 years. Accommodation is offered on three floors, which are served by a passenger lift. The home has a number of communal areas including a sun lounge, two large lounges, a quiet room and dining room. The gardens are at the front and rear of the property, the latter having a summerhouse. The current weekly charge for a room is between £412 and £457. Additional charges are made for chiropody, hairdressing and toiletries. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection, covering the key National Minimum Standards, took into consideration all recent records and contacts relating to the service, including information sent to the Commission by the Providers and surveys completed by residents and their relatives. It also included a site visit to the home on 22/01/07, lasting 8 hours. This visit involved speaking with residents, the manager and staff, as well as a partial tour of premises, observation of care practice and the sampling of records. Of the 22 Standards inspected, 21 were met and 1 was not met on account of a single shortfall. What the service does well: Residents’ comments testified to their positive experiences of the home and the care they received. • • • • • • • • • • I only came in September but I’ve enjoyed every minute of it. I am much improved since I came. It was the right decision. Coming to Alexandra House was a positive move. I am very well looked after. I am very happy here. Staff are all lovely. Staff are always so cheerful. Staff go out of their way to help. They are always patient. They will do anything for you. The manager is always on hand to sort things out. They treat you very well if you are not well. They do everything for you in your room. They respond quickly if you need help and are there in an instant if you fall. The girls are always cleaning. The food is good. DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 • • Alexandra House • I am not a bit eater but there is always something on the menu that suits me. A visitor said: • This placement could not have been better for my relatives. 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. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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 Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. NMS 6 did not apply to Alexandra House. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • Residents’ needs were assessed before they moved into the home. EVIDENCE: Pre admission assessments were not inspected but the two newest residents said that the manager had come to see them and they had visited Alexandra House before making a decision to move in. Residents indicated that they had received enough information about the home to decide it was the right place for them. One person knew the home very well from years of visiting another resident. Another person said, ‘It was my own decision to come in and be looked after’. Post admission assessments, inspected with a sample of care plans, were suitably comprehensive and included a profile and history of the resident. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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): 7, 8, 9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • • • • Residents’ health, personal and social care needs were set out in an individual plan of care. Residents’ health care needs were met. In the main residents were protected by the home’s procedures for dealing with medicines. Care practices promoted residents’ privacy and dignity. EVIDENCE: Care plans were sampled for 4 residents. The home was in the process of introducing a new format for care plans and key workers had been allocated responsibility for transferring information from old care plans and talking individually with residents to bring them up to date. The content of the sample of care plans reflected discussions with the resident concerned. For example, one person’s reference to their small appetite was covered in their care plan. Care plans had continued to be evaluated monthly and residents’ signatures indicated their participation. The manager and staff said that the Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 frequency of care plan reviews, involving the resident, their family, key worker and significant others, was planned to increase from once to twice annually. Although all care plans inspected were adequate, the quality varied and this was attributed to the experience of the key workers involved. It is recommended that staff have training in this area so that all care plans are of an equally high standard. Care plans covered aspects of health, such as oral care, eye care, weight monitoring and health promotion. Feedback from social and healthcare professionals was positive. One person involved with the home said ‘Alexandra House were very professional and conscious of service user needs and feelings, as well as health and safety issues.’ Another commented specifically on the good communication between staff and the District Nurse Team. A GP summed up the care provided as ‘excellent’. Residents, responding to the Commission’s survey also felt that they got the medical care they needed and, in speaking with the inspector made such comments as, ‘Staff have been so helpful, when I haven’t been well.’ A number of residents were sitting in wheelchairs rather than comfortable chairs. Two spoken with said they were content with this. One member of staff said that residents had a choice about where they sat and this included their wheelchair. One care plan included a falls diary linked to updated moving and handling risk assessments. Discussion with the manager showed that occupational therapists had been consulted for advice. Information was displayed about the benefits of exercise and exercise was included in the activity programme. A number of residents were observed doing exercises to a video and, from their coordination, it was evident that this was a regular occurrence. Arrangements for residents to self-medicate were set out in their care plans and provision made for them to keep their medication securely in their own rooms. Arrangements for administering medication were observed at lunchtime. The person responsible was well informed and carried out the process, methodically, sensitively and with care. They took appropriate action upon finding a signature entered in the wrong place in the medication administration records and described how this situation would normally have been avoided. It was noted that two residents were sharing one named bottle of medication, which is contrary to regulations governing the administration of medication. The staff member administering medication explained that this was due to a lack of space on the medication trolley and that a larger trolley was on order. Discussion showed that appropriate procedures were followed in respect of PRN (as needed) medication and consideration given to relevant alternative approaches, such as diet and exercise. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Residents spoken with were positive about their experience of living at Alexandra House, comfortable with the way staff treated them and how they were supported and assisted. In discussion, staff showed that they were sensitive to the different ways and changing needs of residents. Staff were respectful in their approach to residents, as observed throughout the inspection. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • • • • Residents Residents Residents Residents found the lifestyle at the home suited them. maintained contact with the people who mattered to them. were helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. enjoyed balanced meals in pleasant surroundings. EVIDENCE: Care plans showed that consideration was given to individual need for leisure, social and spiritual activities. Residents indicated that there were activities, arranged by the home that they could take part in. The home ran an activities programme, supported by an activities coordinator (8 a.m. – 1 p.m. Monday to Friday) and a number of volunteers. Activities for the day were displayed outside the lounge, where they took place and included one to one time with staff, exercises to video and reading newspapers. The exercises were seen in progress and staff were observed at different times sitting and talking with residents. Several residents showed they valued the opportunities for religious observance, offered by the home. Minutes of the Residents Forum (November Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 2006) showed that residents were being consulted about the programme of activities. Residents indicated that the routines of the home suited them. Although it was practice for residents to be brought a cup of tea at 6 a.m., residents said they did not have to wake up or get up at that time. One person thought it was rather a long time between this first cup of tea and breakfast at 8.45 but said they got plenty of drinks during the day. The manager said that residents were given a choice about the early morning tea. One of the sampled care plans confirmed this. Another person had signed a declaration that they did not wish to be disturbed by routine checks at night. One care plan inspected showed the person’s preferred daily routines. Staff spoke about the need for ongoing consultation with residents and avoiding assumptions based on old information. Care plans also included bathing records. Residents said that they had baths at set days and times. In discussing this residents thought they could probably ask for different times but it appeared they had accepted the time allocated to them. One said that they were glad their bath had been moved to the morning because they had found it too tiring in the evening. Residents’ contacts with their family and friends were recorded in their care plans. Some residents took themselves out to community and church. The contributions of volunteers and ministers of religion also provided links with the community. The home regularly distributed a newsletter keeping family, friends and supporters abreast with events and developments. The inspector found that the home promoted residents’ autonomy and choice through opportunities for participation in care planning and residents’ meetings. The home encouraged residents to bring furniture and possessions from home and provided secure facilities in their rooms to promote independence with their personal money. It was evident from a sample of residents’ records that they had access to them. Residents said they enjoyed their meals. One person said, ‘There is always something on the menu that suits me’. Staff informed the inspector that separate puddings and cakes were prepared to meet the needs of people with diabetes. Menus were displayed and residents said they were asked a day in advance what they would like from the menu. The dining area offered pleasant surroundings and tables were attractively laid. The manager said that residents were encouraged to have lunch in the dining room but other meals could be taken in their rooms. This was also evident from the sample of care plans. It was the practice of the home to change the seating arrangements periodically to give residents a chance to mix and get to know everyone. A relatively new resident said they were quite happy to do this. Some residents had their meal at a table in the adjacent Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 lounge. The manager and staff explained that said that this was reserved for residents who had particular difficulties with eating, to minimise the impact on them and on other residents. Minutes of residents’ meetings showed that they were consulted about their meals. Staff were heard offering choice at teatime between white bread or brown and a selection of fruit. Residents were also heard making requests for what they wanted with the bread. The atmosphere at lunch and tea felt relaxed and unhurried. Records showed that staff had been instructed that residents were not to be rushed at mealtimes and that plates should be left until everyone on the table had finished. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • • The views of residents and their relatives were listened to and acted upon. Residents were protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: Residents had various opportunities for making comments about their service, including one to one time with staff and key workers and monthly meetings with the manager. The home’s complaints procedure and forms for residents to give feedback about the service were prominently displayed. Records and minutes of residents’ meetings showed that issues raised had been addressed. One person described the satisfactory handling and outcome of a complaint they had made. In the interests of confidentiality, entries in the complaints log should be recorded on separate pages. The person making the record should also sign it. The compliments folder contained a number of cards of thanks. Residents were positive about their experience of Alexandra House and particularly about the way they were treated, making such comments as, ‘I am very well looked after,’ ‘staff are all lovely’, ‘staff go out of their way to help. They are always patient. They will do anything for you.’ One person said they had never experienced unkindness from any of the staff. Others expressed admiration for the patience staff showed in difficult or trying Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 situations. Staff on duty during the inspection interacted sensitively with residents. In the interests of residents’ safety and wellbeing, staff were expected to update their protection of vulnerable adults training annually and training records evidenced this. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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): 19 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • • Residents were living in a safe, well-maintained environment. The home was clean, pleasant and hygienic. EVIDENCE: The home employed a maintenance person and kept a log for maintenance purposes. Areas inspected were found to be well maintained and fit for purpose. Residents enjoyed a choice of spacious communal areas, variously provided with piano, wide screen television and equipment for listening to music. Bathrooms and en suite facilities were suitably equipped to assist to maintain residents’ mobility and radiators covered for their protection. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Residents were able to bring furniture from home and personalise their rooms. They spoke enthusiastically about their personal accommodation, especially those able to enjoy a view of the sea. Residents were provided with secure facilities for medication and valuables. Laundry facilities were suitable for the needs of residents, including two new machines. All areas inspected were clean and fresh and residents commented positively on standards of hygiene and cleanliness. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • Residents were supported and protected by the home’s staffing, recruitment and training practices. EVIDENCE: Inspection of the roster and various discussions showed that the home operated with sufficient numbers of staff; a minimum of 3 care staff, including a senior, during the day, 4 at peak times and 2 awake at night. In addition to care staff the home also employed daily 2 domestic staff, 1 laundry assistant, 1 cook and 1 kitchen assistant. The inspector was informed that bank staff were available to provide cover in an emergency and that, as contracted staff worked part-time, they had the flexibility to cover extra shifts, if necessary. Residents, who responded to the Commission’s survey, said that staff were ‘always’ or ‘usually’ available when they needed them. They made comments such as ‘sometimes you have to wait but they always come’. One person who spoke with the inspector said ‘They respond quickly if you need help, they are there in an instant if you fall.’ Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Staff files included a front sheet giving an overview of the information held on each person. Although original documents were held at head office, copies of the records required by regulation were also available on the files sampled for this inspection. They showed that staff had not started working at the home before the completion of the required checks, including satisfactory Criminal Record Bureau disclosures and two written references. The induction programme and foundation training for new staff specified topics to be covered during the course of six months, including complaints, equal opportunities, residents’ cultural needs, protection of vulnerable adults, managing challenging behaviour, key working, care planning and the code of conduct for care workers. A new member of staff said they had spent 4 days shadowing another member of staff before doing any work. They felt their induction and support from the staff team had prepared them well for the work they had to do. The manager was informed about the portable induction programme, introduced by Skills for Care (organisation that sets standards for social care training). A sample of records showed that staff kept up to date with health and safety and protection of vulnerable adults training and went on to take the National Vocational Qualification in care, Level 2, following completion of the foundation programme. The manager reported that 55 of staff had achieved NVQ Level 2, and another six were working towards the qualification. This demonstrated the home’s commitment to ensuring that staff had completed the recognised qualification for carers. It is recommended that the home also take advantage of training provided by the local nurse specialists for residential care homes. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. • • • • Residents were benefiting from the way the home was managed. Residents’ personal money was safeguarded. Staff were appropriately supervised. The health, safety and welfare of residents and staff were promoted and protected. EVIDENCE: Feedback from healthcare professionals involved with the home was positive in respect the management of the home. For example, one district nurse said Alexandra House ‘appears to be very professionally run, with satisfied clients’. One of the residents told the inspector that the manager was ‘always on hand to sort things out’. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 It was evident that the quality of the service was monitored by various means and at different levels. For example, the inspection coincided with the provider’s monitoring visit under Regulation 26 of the Care Homes Regulations 2001. The person involved was observed interviewing residents in line with regulatory requirements. The providers also conducted a quarterly audit and a 2-day annual review of the service with a view to maintaining and improving standards of care. The manager held various meetings for volunteers and staff (ancillary and night staff having their own meetings as well as coming to full staff meetings) and residents (Residents Forum and more informal Coffee and Chat) to obtain their views and deal with any issues as they arose. These meetings were minuted. Residents and their families had opportunity to comment on the service at reviews, relatives’ meetings and on feedback forms available in the home. . Discussions with the manager and inspection of the records, receipts and balance for a resident, whose personal money was held by the home for safety, showed clear recording and auditing of all transactions. Arrangements for ensuring that residents had access to their personal money included the use of personal safes where this was appropriate. Residents confirmed that the arrangements suited them. Records showed that staff received annual appraisals and supervision at about two monthly intervals, in line with NMS 36. Staff confirmed that they had regular supervision, lasting about 20 to 30 minutes. The level of satisfaction of residents suggested that staff were getting the support they needed to do their jobs well. Staff also indicated that they found the general support from colleagues, one to one meetings and staff meetings helpful. The brevity of some supervision records suggested a need for more focussed discussions or more detailed recording of the content of the meetings. The organisation operated an incentive scheme for long service. Records showed that installations and equipment were routinely checked and serviced and that staff had covered the required health and safety training. Minutes of a seniors’ meeting showed that the contents of the First Aid box were checked every week. Records showed that accident reports were analysed monthly. Detailed risk assessments, covering a wide range of environmental and health and safety matters, had been reviewed and staff had acknowledged by signing the reviews that they had read and understood the contents. No risks to health and safety were identified in the course of this inspection. Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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 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 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 3 X 3 X X 3 Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.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. Standard OP9 Regulation 13 Requirement The registered persons must ensure that procedures for supporting residents with medication fully promote their safety. Timescale for action 28/02/07 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. Refer to Standard OP16 Good Practice Recommendations It is recommended that, in the interests of confidentiality, entries in the complaints log be recorded on separate pages. The person making the record should also sign the entry. It is recommended that the registered persons take advantage of training provided locally by nurse specialists for care homes. 2. OP30 Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Colchester Local Office 1st Floor, Fairfax House Causton Road Colchester Essex CO1 1RJ 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 Alexandra House DS0000017747.V330777.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - 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!