Inspection on 16/12/05 for Apple House

This inspection was carried out on 16th December 2005.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. 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

Apple House 31/07/08

Apple House 16/07/07

Apple House 10/08/06

Apple House 22/02/06

Similar services:

2 Perhaver Park

The Vicarage

St George`s

5 Seafield Road

Credence House

Radfords

Honeybourne House

32 Beaumont Way

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Apple House 186 Seafield Road Bournemouth Dorset BH6 5LJ Lead Inspector Heidi Banks Unannounced Inspection 15:00 16 December 2005 th Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Apple House Address 186 Seafield Road Bournemouth Dorset BH6 5LJ 01202 429093 01202 773410 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) Apple House Limited Mrs Jane Elizabeth Montrose Care Home 4 Category(ies) of Learning disability (4) registration, with number of places Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Service users to be admitted must be ambulant and able to manage stairs. N/A Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Apple House is a residential care home registered to accommodate a maximum of four adults with a learning disability. Apple House is a semi-detached house located in the Southbourne area of Bournemouth. The property is in keeping with the neighbourhood. It is situated within easy reach of local shops and community facilities. Bus routes to Christchurch, Boscombe and Bournemouth are easily accessed. Accommodation is provided in single bedrooms. Three bedrooms are on the first floor of the property, one of which has its own en-suite facilities. There is one bathroom for shared use by three residents. One bedroom is situated on the ground floor. The home has an attractively decorated and furnished lounge, kitchen and dining room area. There is a patio area and garden to the rear of the property for use by residents. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection was unannounced and took place over the course of approximately 2.5 hours on a weekday afternoon. The inspection was part of the statutory routine of inspecting the care home twice a year. At the time of the inspection there were three residents living at Apple House. The age range of the service users is currently between 56 and 58. On the inspector’s arrival there were two residents present and one member of staff on duty. They had just returned from a walk to a local parade of shops. The third resident was attending College but returned home during the inspection. The length of the inspection was determined by the fact that residents were due to go out that evening for dinner at a local restaurant. Information for this report was obtained from discussion with two of the three residents at the home, responses on comment cards from relatives of service users, GPs and health / social care professionals who have contact with the home, discussion with the staff member on duty at the time of inspection, observation of staff interaction with service users, inspection of service user records and a guided tour of the premises. The inspector was able to talk with two residents at the home. Both reported that they were happy with the support provided to them by staff and that they enjoyed living at Apple House. The inspector was pleased to receive a total of six comment cards from relatives of service users, GPs and health / social care professionals. All indicated that they were satisfied with the overall care provided to service users and responses from health / social care professionals demonstrated that the home works in partnership with them to meet the needs of service users. Two comment cards were received from relatives of service users. These indicated that they were satisfied with the overall care provided, that they are welcomed in the home, that they are able to see their relative in private and felt that they are kept informed of important matters affecting their relative. One relative stated that they were not aware of the complaints procedure in the home. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 What the service does well: 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. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6 and 9 Residents may not be aware of how their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan at the present time as a new system of care planning is being introduced by the home. Comprehensive risk assessments in place at the home demonstrate how service users are supported to take risks and their independence is promoted. EVIDENCE: At the time of inspection a new system of individual Plans was being implemented. Some documents in residents’ records were incomplete. It was unclear from the templates in residents’ files how the format of the individual Plans would be accessible to them. This standard will be assessed more fully at the next inspection. It was noted that one resident had a chart of ‘Daily Tasks’ in his room to support him with his daily routine. However, this was not in a format that was accessible to him. This was discussed with the resident and member of staff on duty who agreed that the resident himself could be involved in developing his own chart in a meaningful format. This was also discussed with the Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 Registered Manager following the inspection who has agreed to support the resident with this process. A sample of risk assessments were examined. A ‘Checklist of Activities’ is used for each resident to make an initial assessment of potential risk in various activities of daily living, domestic tasks, community activities and social activities. More detailed risk assessments are completed where risks are identified. These identify the nature of the activity being undertaken, the level of risk, positive and negative effects, likelihood, impact and outcomes. It was noted that psychological and social factors were taken into account and there was a focus on promoting independence. Guidelines have been established to minimise risk. It was positive to note that in several cases, contributors had ‘signed up’ to the care plan including the resident and a Community Nurse. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 13, 16 and 17 Residents are supported to access their community on a regular basis and pursue social and educational opportunities that are of interest to them. Residents report that their rights are generally respected by staff which means that they are encouraged to live ordinary lives and make choices and decisions. The home offers a varied diet to residents which takes account of their individual needs. Residents appear to enjoy their meals. EVIDENCE: Residents stated that they are given opportunities to go out in their local community on a regular basis. One resident said that he goes to college twice a week and is also undertaking a computing course at a local library once a week. The same resident reported that he attends Church with a member of staff on occasion. Another resident reported that he visits local towns including Christchurch and Bournemouth on a regular basis and sometimes goes to the pub with staff. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 At the start of the inspection two residents had gone for a walk to nearby shops with a member of staff and plans were in place for all three residents to go out for a meal that evening to a local restaurant. One resident has access to a bicycle and reported that he likes to go for rides in the area. One resident said that he was hoping to go on a barge holiday with staff and peers during 2006. Two residents said that they felt that staff acknowledged their rights. One resident reported that there had been an incident where a member of staff had told him he should go to bed at an earlier time than was his choice. He had disagreed with this and had informed the Registered Manager of the incident. The inspector discussed this issue with the Registered Manager the following day who reported that the matter had been taken seriously and was being addressed. The member of staff on duty at the time of inspection was able to talk with confidence about how he would empower service users to make choices on a daily basis. Two residents reported that they were given choices in their daily lives, for example, what they would like in their lunch box or what they wanted to watch on television. One resident spoke about his recent purchase of a computer which staff had supported him to buy. One resident talked about the responsibilities he has around the home and stated that he enjoys helping staff with washing-up, gardening and hoovering. The week’s menu plan was seen and showed a variety of meals on offer. The two residents interviewed stated that the food provided was good and that they had no complaints. There was a bowl of fresh fruit in the kitchen to which residents could help themselves and one resident stated that he would be able to prepare a snack for himself if he wanted one and help himself to drinks. Attention is paid in individual Plans to the dietary needs of each resident. Residents report that they do not get involved in the planning of the menu and that groceries are ordered by the Registered Manager via a supermarket website. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18 and 19 Personal support is offered in a way as to promote residents’ privacy, dignity and independence. Service users are supported to access generic and specialist health care resources to meet their physical and emotional health needs. EVIDENCE: Service users reported that they were happy with the personal support given to them by staff and stated that staff were helpful. Guidelines are available to staff around minimising risks in supporting service users with personal care tasks and there is emphasis on promoting independence and enabling service users to do as much as possible for themselves. A sample of service user files were examined. These demonstrated that service users are supported to attend health care appointments as appropriate including appointments at their local GP surgery and to access specialist health care services including Psychology, Audiology, Speech and Language Therapy and Nursing. A record of appointments is maintained. Two comment cards were received from GPs who have contact with residents and staff at the home. Both indicated that staff at the home communicate clearly and work in partnership with them and that staff demonstrate a clear Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 understanding of the needs of residents. One GP commented that he was ‘very satisfied’ with the overall care provided to service users in the home and that staff were ‘very caring’. One comment card was received from a Care Manager who said she was ‘very impressed with this fairly new residential home…All staff appear professional and work with my client to increase independence in a supportive, caring manner.’ Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 Good relationships between residents, staff and the manager mean that service users’ views are taken seriously and action taken to resolve any issues that arise. EVIDENCE: Two service users reported that they felt able to express their views to staff and that staff listened to them. Both service users stated that they would approach the Registered Manager of the home if they had a complaint about the service they were receiving. Both service users said that the Registered Manager was approachable and they would have no hesitation in talking to her about their views. There is a complaints procedure in place at the home. However, one relative of a service user stated that they were not aware of the complaints procedure. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score X X X X X Standard No 22 23 Score 2 X ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 2 X X 3 X Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score X X X X X X X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 X 13 3 14 X 15 X 16 3 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score X X X X X X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Apple House Score 3 3 X X Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score X X X X X X X DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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. 1 2 Refer to Standard YA6 YA22 Good Practice Recommendations Individual Plans should be made available in a language and format the service user can understand. Relatives of service users should be made aware of the complaints procedure within the home and supplied with a written copy of the procedure if requested. Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 Commission for Social Care Inspection Poole Office Unit 4 New Fields Business Park Stinsford Road Poole BH17 0NF National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Apple House DS0000063160.V273504.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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!