Please wait

Please note that the information on this website is now out of date. It is planned that we will update and relaunch, but for now is of historical interest only and we suggest you visit cqc.org.uk

Inspection on 21/02/07 for Angel Court Residential Home

Also see our care home review for Angel Court Residential Home for more information

This inspection was carried out on 21st February 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.

What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.

What the care home does well

The home provides residents with a good quality of life in an environment which is well maintained, comfortable and homely. One resident described the staff as "very good" and that they enjoyed "good cooked meals every day". The staffing levels provided are appropriate to meet the needs of residents. The home has a designated activities co-ordinator and offer a wide variety of activities. The location of the home means that residents are easily able to access the local facilities in the town centre.

What has improved since the last inspection?

The home has addressed the requirement and recommendations made following their last inspection. They have updated their service users guide/statement of purpose, and senior care staff have received training, to support residents who have acquired hospital related infections.

What the care home could do better:

The home should complete their own pre-assessments, to supplement the information given on Social Care assessments. This will support them in not only identifying if they will be able to meet residents physical and social care needs, but assess their compatibility with other residents living at the home. Staffs knowledge on the resident`s needs were good, they were able to say how much assistance they gave, and what the resident was encouraged to do for themselves to maintain their independence. However, not all the care plans read, reflected the same level of information, which is important for new and agency staff who may not know the resident as well. Not all care plansevidence that the residents (or if unable their representative) had been asked their wishes and preferences on how they wished to be looked after. The home musty ensure recruitment processes are followed fully they must ensure they receive two written references and check employment history for staff prior to being employed. Notice boards should reflect appropriate information for residents and not be overcrowded, having public notices on doors about staff not accepting physical or verbally threatening behaviour is not in keeping with a homely environment.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Angel Court Residential Home Angel Street Hadleigh Ipswich Suffolk IP7 5HA Lead Inspector Sue Jenkins Unannounced Inspection 21st February 2007 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 Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Angel Court Residential Home Address Angel Street Hadleigh Ipswich Suffolk IP7 5HA 01473 823147 01473 829157 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) Suffolk County Council Mrs Frances Mary Nunn Care Home 29 Category(ies) of Dementia (10), Old age, not falling within any registration, with number other category (19) of places Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 2nd February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Angel Court is a residential home for older people situated in the heart of the market town of Hadleigh, close to local amenities and owned and administrated by Suffolk County Council. The home offers accommodation and care for up to 29 residents. 10 places are allocated for those with special needs (inclusive of one special needs respite bed), the remaining 19 places also includes one respite bed. The home was initially opened in the mid 1960s and extensively refurbished between September 1996 and May 1997. Angel Court also operates a twelve place day centre for older people, having its own access and facilities. At the present time the day service is not subject to registration and inspection. The accommodation, located on two floors, includes a lift, and a staircase, connecting the two floor levels. The home has a garden, which includes patio-seating areas, birdbath and table. There is off road car parking at the front of the home. Current fees for this home range from £500.00 to £691.00 Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection was unannounced and took place over seven hours on a weekday. This was a key inspection, which focused on the core standards relating to older people. Sue Jenkins and Jill Clarke carried out the inspection. The report has been written using accumulated evidence gathered prior to and during the inspection. Inspectors reviewed the progress of the requirement made at the last inspection on 2nd February 2006. Time was spent talking with three residents, three staff and the manager. Additionally a number of records were inspected including those relating to residents care plans, staff personnel and training, medication, quality assurance and polices and procedures. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The home should complete their own pre-assessments, to supplement the information given on Social Care assessments. This will support them in not only identifying if they will be able to meet residents physical and social care needs, but assess their compatibility with other residents living at the home. Staffs knowledge on the resident’s needs were good, they were able to say how much assistance they gave, and what the resident was encouraged to do for themselves to maintain their independence. However, not all the care plans read, reflected the same level of information, which is important for new and agency staff who may not know the resident as well. Not all care plans Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 evidence that the residents (or if unable their representative) had been asked their wishes and preferences on how they wished to be looked after. The home musty ensure recruitment processes are followed fully they must ensure they receive two written references and check employment history for staff prior to being employed. Notice boards should reflect appropriate information for residents and not be overcrowded, having public notices on doors about staff not accepting physical or verbally threatening behaviour is not in keeping with a homely environment. 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. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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 Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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): 2 and 3 Standard 6 does not apply Quality in this outcome area is adequate. Service users cannot be assured all their needs will be assessed prior to admission and that they receive full information about the service. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The service users guide and statement of purpose had been updated. The manager stated this had been completed in November 2006 and a copy had been sent to the Commission. However there was no date on the service users guide to indicate this. It was freely available at the home. This information does not state the homes fees. Information relating to three service users was assessed and one of the three was found to have a contract and terms and conditions signed and in their file. The other two residents were awaiting confirmation of their permanent residency at the home before being issued their contracts. Four out of the five returned residents “Have your say” said they had a contract. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 The same three service users files demonstrated that the assessment of need had been completed by social care before the person moved into the home but there was no evidence of the hone undertaking their own assessment. All three service users had a formal review within ten weeks of entering the home. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9 and 10 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents are protected by safe administration and storage of medication. However, residents cannot always expect a comprehensive assessment and care plans that fully reflect their needs. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Four service users care plans were case tracked. All four had a night care arrangements completed. District Nurse, GP and chiropody visits were also recorded. Three out of the four did not have a nutritional screening assessment completed, however, they did all have their weight recorded at least monthly. One assessment had been completed but the total score not recorded. For one resident, who was very elderly there had been a two stone weight loss over approximately two years and there was no evidence of any assessment or care planning. On discussion with this resident they said they ate well and had a choice of food. Moving and handling and continence assessments had been completed for all service users. One assessment did not have a signature or date. Good practice Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 was seen with the care plans kept in the residents bedrooms, to enable them to read what was being said about them. However, there were some abbreviations and jargon used by the carers in the records that residents may not be able to understand. There was no evidence that the service user or the advocate had been involved in putting together the care plan, to ensure their preferences on how they wanted to be cared for had been incorporated. There were four returned relatives/visitors comment cards all stated they were kept informed of important matters and consulted about the care affecting their relative/friend. One care plan did partially reflect the care needed with regard to washing and dressing. However, there was a comment “false teeth must be taken out at night”. The care plan did not say why or if this was the resident’s request. The call bell care plans had not been individualised to each resident. Daily records tended to reflect practical matters i.e. very unsettled rather than action taken to settle the resident. The care plans consisted of ‘templates’ which staff complete to make the information more individualised. When completed this gave a good level of information which covered residents physical, social and mental health needs. However, the standard was not maintained in all care plans looked at, for example no information entered on one resident’s personal care sheet. Three out of the five returned residents “Have your say” said they always received the care they need and two said usually. All five said the staff listen and act on what they say. Where ‘life histories’ had been included in care plans, these were informative, and gave a good insight into the resident’s life and family situation. One resident had had three falls recorded in less than one month, accident forms were completed however, there was no reassessment or risk assessment completed following these falls. Staff, instead of issuing a new front cover for one of the care plans seen, they had blanked out the previous resident’s name with correction fluid, which could draw attention to the resident or their visitor, that someone else had used the folder before them. Interactions between staff and residents were seen to be friendly and appropriate. Three service users medication administration sheets (MAR) were checked. The home use a blister pack system, dispensed by a local pharmacist. The MAR sheets were fully completed, there is a system in place for recording medication coming into and out of the home. An audit check of two medications not held in blister packs was correct to the homes records. The Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 home does not use a carry forward figure for any medication left at the end of the previous 28-day cycle, which makes checking the amount of tablets left against records more difficult. The home had systems in place for the safe keeping and dispensing of controlled medications which included using a witness to check stock levels, and observe the medication being given to the resident. The home treats temazepam (night sedation) as a controlled drug, with all the same checks and procedures. An audit check of one service users stock held against the homes records was correct. Drugs requiring refrigeration are held in a domestic fridge in the locked staff office. The fridge also contains foods, which could cause cross contamination if any items have been opended. Staff write to residents coming in for respite (short break care) before they arrive, to ask them to bring enough medication for their stay, in the pharmacist original containers. A member of staff spoken with said that they had received training with a local pharmacy before coming to Angel Court four years ago. When she started the manger carried out a medication competency as part of her induction. In relation to staff being appropriately supervised there is always a senior on duty. Formal supervision records viewed showed the three staff had received supervision. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14 and 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents can expect social opportunities and to choose a lifestyle that matches their expectations. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has a designated activities co-ordinator. Activities include exercises, board games, cooking, bingo, beetle drive, word games, and nail/hand care and reminiscence group. There is also a monthly church service at the home. All the activities were listed on a notice board in the lounge. Visits to the local town and pub lunches also happened. A pizza and Chinese evening had recently taken place at the request of the residents. The home has links with the local primary school and a local organisation. Three residents spoken with confirmed their family visited and took them on outings. Minutes of last three residents meetings were reviewed and there was evidence that requests/suggestions by residents were acted upon. Some recent changes to the menu choices had been at the request of the residents. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 There is a comprehensive menu and residents can always have alternatives to the main menu. Breakfast is usually bacon and poached/scrambled/fried eggs, toast and cereal. The menu for the day is displayed on a wipe board in each of the three dining rooms. Lunch on the day of the inspection was sausage and onion pie with vegetables, sherry trifle. Supper scrambled egg and banana and pineapple cake. Alternatives include sandwiches, jacket potatoes, salads and soup. Five residents spoken with all stated the food was good with lots of variety. A hot drink with cake/biscuits is available at approximately 8 pm, a carer confirmed that toast and cereal was sometimes requested by residents at this time and it was provided on request. A cold-water dispenser had recently been installed in one of the dining rooms following a request at a residents meeting. Most residents choose to eat in the dining room, however, one resident spoken with said they preferred to eat their meals in their room and this request is accommodated. In one dining room the residents had their name and information relating to specialists diet displayed for all to see including visitors. This need to be kept more discreetly. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. People who use this service can expect that complaints and matters of protection be taken seriously. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints procedure displayed in the main entrance. There is also a copy in the service users guide which all residents have a copy of. There were one reported complaint about the care one resident had received in the last year. The registered manager responded with the timeframe. The home subscribes to the local policy and procedure developed by Suffolk Social Services on protection of vulnerable adults (POVA). The staff files seen showed that staff had received training in POVA. Three staff spoken with all knew the process for reporting abuse. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,20,21,23,24,25 and 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. People living in the home can expect to live in a clean, comfortable and well-maintained home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: A tour of the communal areas and six bedrooms was undertaken, all were found to be clean and tidy throughout. Two of the bedrooms had resident’s own furniture in. All six bedrooms seen had en-suite toilet and wash hand basin facilities. One en suite facility had paper towels available which were not in a paper towel holder. One bedroom had scuffmarks along two of the walls. Bedrooms had personal possessions such as photographs, pictures and books. Accommodation is on two floors with access via a passenger lift. Angel Court is well decorated and maintained to a good standard. The communal lounges have armchairs, a television, books and games. There are three dining rooms and residents sit with groups of two to four people. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 One of the laundry rooms was viewed it had two washing machines and a dryer. There is a sluice cycle. However, there are no hand washing facilities in the laundry room. A policy for handling soiled linen was clearly displayed. Two bathrooms and two toilets were viewed, all had liquid soap and paper towels available and were clean and tidy. Alcohol gel was also available in several parts of the home, as part of the home’s infection control procedures. The hoists were serviced on 22/9/2006. Universal precautions re hand hygiene were clearly displayed in both bathrooms. There was evidence of testing hot water temperatures in the bathroom to ensure the safety of residents prior to each resident having a bath. All recordings were within the accepted range. Two of the kitchens microwaves had food spillages on the inside. The temperatures of the fridges were checked usually daily and recorded. However, it was not noted on the record sheets what the accepted temperature range is. Main corridors/hallways were wheel chair accessible and had grab rails. Wheel chairs were stored tidily in a storeroom. All fire exits were clearly marked and designated. Fire extinguishers had been serviced on 22/12/2006. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29 and 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents can expect to be supported by sufficient numbers of staff that are well trained and can meet their needs. However, staff were found to be adequately recruited with a minor shortfall. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The staff rota was seen and this reflected the staff on duty, six carers including one senior, two kitchen staff, laundry assistant, activities co-coordinator and the handyman. There are five to six carers throughout the day and one senior and two carers during the night. It was observed that the three carers on duty were calm and carried out their duties well. In house staff provide sickness cover, agency staff have been used in the last year the registered manager stated usually for two shifts per week. Three new relief carers are starting employment imminently. One service user stated “some staff are very good” and staff run a bath for them. Another service users said staff “were very good” and she enjoyed the company of the staff and other residents. The recruitment process was reviewed and three staff records were seen. Two staff had the necessary checks in place. One staff member appointed in the last year working at the home did not have evidence of a second written reference. There was also an eight year gap relating to employment history Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 and there was no evidence this had been checked. All three staff files had a copy of the interview questions and answers which is good practice. At the last inspection recruitment practices were good. Training records were up to date and the training includes moving and handling, fire safety, infection control, food handling and first aid. There are twenty nine care staff and fifteen staff have completed National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in care level two. Nine staff have completed NVQ level three in care. There is a clear commitment from the home to staff training and development. Three staff spoken with said the training was very good and there was lots of variety. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35,36,37 and 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents can expect to live in a home that is managed by an appropriately qualified manager. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The manager of the home has been working as the manager of Angel Court since 1995. Having been trained as a nurse qualifying as a Reghistered General Nurse in 1986. The home does keep small amounts of personal money for residents and allows them access when they need it. Systems are in place for keeping residents monies and valuables in safekeeping. Money held is recorded on individual residents money record sheets, which records the date in and out, balance and two signatures. Monies held for one service user was checked against the homes records and correct. Valuables, a property book is kept. All items are recorded on a log – the resident/representative sign a receipt on Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 giving in and the returning of the item. A check of one resident’s valuables held against the log was correct. Care plans also held a ‘property list’ completed on admission. In relation to staff being appropriately supervised there is always a senior on duty. Formal supervision records viewed showed the three staff had received supervision. From inspection of records it was evident that records required by the food standards agency were being kept and monitored including fridge and freezer temperatures of food being served. Other Health and Safety matters relating to bath water temperatures, fire safety have been addressed in the environment section. The home has a quality assurance tool, a questionnaire with several questions that is given to residents. There were some copies available, some were not dated but a staff member said they had been completed in the last year. It was not clear how this information was utilised; however, it was not checked with the manager on the day of inspection. Staff meeting and residents meeting minutes were seen. Both meetings seem to happen frequently and the minutes are available for all to see and points are actioned accordingly. The home’s certificate of registration and employers liability insurance was seen displayed in the main hall. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 2 2 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 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 3 3 X 3 3 3 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 3 3 3 Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 OP2 Regulation 5 (1) (b) Requirement Timescale for action 31/03/07 2. OP3 14 (1) (a) (2) (a) 3. OP29 19 (1) (b) schedule 2 The responsible person must ensure the fees payable and the method of payment is included in the individual residents contract. The responsible person must 28/02/07 demonsrate they have undertaken their own assessment alongside the social care assessment. The responsible person must 28/02/07 ensure the staff member identified at inspection has all recruitment records in place i.e. ,two written references and full employment history. 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 OP7 OP9 Good Practice Recommendations To complete a nutritional assessment on all residents. To use a carry forward figure for tablets left from the previous 28-day cycle, which provides a clear audit trail. DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Angel Court Residential Home 3 4 5 6 7 OP9 OP10 OP19 OP19 OP26 Us a sealed container for medication and applications to be stored in the fridge to ensure no cross infection. To use a new front sheet for each resident. Remove public notice from doors relating to “our staff are here to help you … our staff are sometimes faced with abuse” to provide a more homely environment. A hand wash basin be provided in the laundry rooms The microwaves be cleaned. Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Suffolk Area Office St Vincent House Cutler Street Ipswich Suffolk IP1 1UQ 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 Angel Court Residential Home DS0000037158.V330198.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!