Inspection on 01/12/06 for Arthur Clarke

This inspection was carried out on 1st December 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Good. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Arthur Clarke 11/03/08

Arthur Clarke 24/11/05

Arthur Clarke 29/04/05

Arthur Clarke 19/10/04

Arthur Clarke 04/05/04

Similar services:

St Vincents

The Cotswold Home

Winton House

Newbeech House

Rush Court

Hillyfield Rest Home

The Maypole Nursing Centre

The Briars

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Arthur Clarke 1 Albert Road Caversham Reading Berkshire RG4 7AN Lead Inspector Lilian Mackay Unannounced Inspection 1st December 2006 09:45 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 Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.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. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Arthur Clarke Address 1 Albert Road Caversham Reading Berkshire RG4 7AN 0118 9015359 0118 9015360 debbie.wilcox@reading.gov.uk 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) Reading Borough Council Deborah Anne Willcox Care Home 28 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (28), Physical disability (2) of places Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. No service users to be admitted under 55 years of age. Service users category PD to be respite care only. Date of last inspection 24th November 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Arthur Clark is a moderate sized residential care home for service users over the age of 65(OP) and up to 2 service users with a physical disability aged 5565 years of age. The home has 22 beds for long-term residency and 6 beds for respite and emergency short-term placements. Reading Borough Council runs the home. A day centre for the elderly, which is also the responsibility of Reading Borough Council, is linked to the home and shares the catering and staff facilities. Residents can only be admitted to the home through a Social Services referral process. The fee for this service is £440.95 per week. Items not covered by the fees include chiropody, hairdressing and aromatherapy. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The Commission has, since the 1st April 2006, developed the way it undertakes its inspection of care services. This inspection of the service was an unannounced “Key Inspection”. It was a thorough look at how well the service is doing. It took into account detailed information provided by the service’s manager, and any information that the CSCI has received about the service since the last inspection. The inspector looked at how well the service was meeting the standards set by the government and has in this report made judgements about the standard of the service. The purpose of this inspection was to see how the agency is meeting the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People. This unannounced “Key Inspection” took place from 9.45am to 5pm on a weekday and consisted of discussions with residents of the home, two residents’ relatives/friends and staff to discuss their experience of the service provided, examining residents’ and staff records and other documentation and touring the home. Management contributed greatly to this inspection by sending the CSCI full and timely pre – inspection information and arranging for residents to complete questionnaires. Feedback was also obtained from questionnaires undertaken with GPs. From the evidence seen by the inspector and comments received, the inspector considers that this service would be able to provide a service to meet the needs of individuals of various religious, racial or cultural needs. Staff feedback was very positive. All confirmed recruitment procedures and induction procedures to be adequate and appropriate, that they were familiar with the home’s policies, procedures and guidelines, that they were fully briefed before starting work with new residents, that they always worked within their areas of expertise, that they were familiar with safeguarding adults procedures, that they had enough time allocated to meet residents’ needs as indicated on their care plans, that they met with their manager regularly, that they received regular supervision and that they had regular team meetings. Feedback was obtained from questionnaires completed by eight GPs with knowledge of the home and this was also very positive. All confirmed that the home communicated clearly and worked in partnership with them, that there was always a senior member of staff to confer with, that they were able to see their patients in private, that staff demonstrated a clear understanding of residents’ care needs, that any specialist advice they had given was incorporated into residents’ care plans, that medication was appropriately managed in the home, that staff took appropriate decisions when they could Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 no longer manage residents’ care needs and all were satisfied with the overall care provided to residents within the home. Eight reported that they had never received any complaints about the home and three felt that the CSCI inspection report would be made available to them on request. GPs’ comments included – “No complaints. Good caring staff”. “Happy with the perceived standard of care and the threshold for requesting medical advice.” “A good, well managed home”. Feedback was obtained from discussion with two relatives/friends with knowledge of the home and this was also very positive. Both confirmed that staff welcomed them in the home at any time, that there were always sufficient staff on duty, that they were able to see their relatives/friends in private, that they were kept informed of important matters affecting their relative/friend, that they were aware of the home’s complaints procedure and that they were satisfied with the overall service provided. Neither of them had ever had to make a complaint. One relative/friend commented, “Staff excellent, very caring. I feel the residents should be taken out for walks. I feel they sit about too long.” Feedback was obtained from eight questionnaires completed by residents. Four recalled receiving contracts, seven felt they had received enough information about the home before moving in, four felt they always received the care and support they needed and four felt they usually did, all eight felt that staff listened to them and acted on what they said, four felt that staff were always available when they needed them and four felt they usually were, six felt they always received the medical support they needed and two felt they usually did, one felt that the home always arranged activities they could take part in, four felt the home usually did and three felt they sometimes did, four always liked the meals provided by the home, two usually did and one sometimes did, six knew who to speak to if they were not happy, five always knew how to make a complaint and three usually did, three felt the home was always kept fresh and clean by the staff and five felt that it usually was. Residents’ comments included – “Staff all very nice and helpful. An organised outing would be nice. Meals are nicely cooked with plenty of choice and plenty food.” “There does not always appear to be enough arm chairs in the main lounge”. “The staff are great – caring. We could not ask for any more. We could do with more activities. There is not enough going on. The meals are great and plentiful. The rooms always smell nice.” “I have been quite happy here. I came in in an emergency. Things are quite good here”. “I am happy”. The inspector would like to thank the Arthur Clarke Home staff, relatives and residents for their courtesy, assistance and hospitality throughout this inspection. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Update the home’s Statement of Purpose to include all the information required by the Regulations. Update the home’s Service User Guide to give the current contact details of the CSCI. Improve the lighting in the private and communal areas for residents’ safety. Replace the corridor carpets to improve the home’s freshness. Review the laundry arrangements to improve the standards of this service. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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): 1,2,3,6. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Individual care needs assessments are carried out before admission to ensure that the home can meet the individual’s needs. Prospective service users are invited to visit the home before making a decision. The home does not provide intermediate care. Respite care is provided. EVIDENCE: The home’s Statement of Purpose submitted at this time must be updated to include all the information required by Schedule 1 of the Care Homes Regulations. The home’s Service User Guide needs amending to indicate the current contact details for the CSCI. Staff spoken to confirmed that before new residents come to live at the home they are given a copy of the home’s Service User Guide. Both relatives/friends spoken to confirmed that their Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 relative/friend had been given a copy of the home’s Service User Guide. Staff spoken to confirmed that prospective residents or those wishing to have respite care at the home are invited to visit the home to have a look around including areas such as the laundry and the kitchen and to speak to staff and fellow residents in order that they can make an informed choice as to whether the home is suitable for them. One staff member commented about this process – “You want to know what is behind closed doors”. New residents are given contracts after they have completed the six-week assessment period and accompanying review of their care. Changes to these are notified via residents’ meetings, letters to residents/family members and to care managers. Both relatives/friends spoken to were unsure whether or not their relative/friend had received a copy of the contract. Care managers undertake individual care needs assessments and the registered manager also carries out an assessment to ensure the home is suitable to meet the prospective resident’s needs. An examination of a sample of residents’ care records indicated that care needs assessments had been carried out for all of them. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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): 7,8,9,10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. All residents have care plans drawn up from assessments of needs. Residents’ health needs are well met with evidence of regular multi – disciplinary working. The medication administration procedures are generally good. Residents are treated with respect and their right to privacy upheld. EVIDENCE: The home operates a key worker system where one designated member of staff has responsibility for ensuring an individual resident’s care needs are met. All residents’ sampled had care plans drawn up by a senior member of staff with the assistance of the resident. An examination of a sample of care plans indicated that these clearly identified residents’ care needs and any areas of risk for them. The daily records examined confirmed that staff work to meet residents’ needs as detailed in their care plans. Care plans are reviewed within the home monthly to ensure they accurately reflect residents’ care needs. Residents, their relatives/friends and their care managers are invited to the six Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 monthly reviews of their care plans. Evidence was seen that residents’ relatives/friends were involved in care reviews with the resident’s permission. The inspector noted good practice in the recording of health care professionals’ visits, accidents, body maps to identify injuries sustained, inventories and daily nutrition charts. Whilst residents’ life histories are not currently routinely recorded a pro forma for doing so has been devised, staff have attended training on completing these and it is planned to introduce these for all residents shortly. The inspector commends this initiative. Evidence was seen of prompt referrals to the community health services, when required. Following an examination of the medication administration procedures it is recommended that staff initial any changes made to the medication records, that where variable doses are prescribed the actual number given are recorded, that medication records are checked on arrival to ensure that PRN [when required] medication is shown as such and that spoiled medications for return are locked away in the medication cupboard. Overall the storage, handling, administration and recording of medications were found to be of a high standard. Residents spoken to confirmed that their privacy and dignity is respected and the inspector observed friendly, kindly and respectful interactions between staff and residents. Staff demonstrated in discussion their sensitivity to ensuring residents’ privacy, rights, independence and dignity are safeguarded and promoted. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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): 12,13,14,15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The daily life and social activities provided could be developed further to match the residents’ preferences and interests. Residents are encouraged to have visitors. Residents feel that they have the opportunity to make choices and to exercise control in their daily lives. Residents enjoy the food provided. EVIDENCE: Ballroom dancers entertain monthly. Activities provided by the home include crafts, Bingo, games, quizzes, puzzles and reminiscence. There is weekly Communion and visiting church groups. Outside the home residents attend family organised activities and go for meals out. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Residents are encouraged to have visitors outside meal times. In discussion relatives/friends said that they felt welcome at the home. The visitors to the home seen looked relaxed and at ease. Residents’ commented - “An organised outing would be nice.” “We could do with more activities. There is not enough going on.” Relatives/friends commenting about the arrangements for activities said, “I feel the residents should be taken out for walks. I feel they sit about too long”. “They are doing more with X than when he first came here. Last week he played large snakes and ladders.” “X has not been out since he has been here except to go to the dentist”. Diet and nutrition charts were noted to be used where there are dietary concerns. Residents spoken to were satisfied with the quality, quantity and variety of the food provided. Residents commented, “The meals are great and plentiful.” “Meals are nicely cooked with plenty of choice and plenty food.” One staff member commented, “Waste could be reduced by having a light/sandwich meal when there is a cooked breakfast.” Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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): 16,18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are aware of the complaints procedure, and confident that any concerns or complaint would be taken seriously and acted upon appropriately. Staff are adequately trained to safeguard residents. EVIDENCE: New residents are given a copy of the home’s complaints procedure when they first come to live at the home. Residents are encouraged to make their views known at residents’ meetings and there is also a complaints box. Staff reported that they frequently remind residents how to complain. An examination of the complaints log indicated that the home had received sixteen complaints since 6/02/06. All of these were responded to within 28 days. Five of these related to laundry issues. Three related to residents feeling rushed or staff doing things too quickly. One resident spoken to echoed this. Complaints are monitored monthly. The Commission has received information concerning one complaint made against the service since the last inspection and judges that the provider has met the regulations in relation to complaints. One relative/friend commented,” People feel comfortable about complaining.” Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 One adult protection investigation was conducted. No referrals of staff were made for inclusion on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults list. All staff spoken to had received recent training on safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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): 19,26. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provides comfortable surroundings and is equipped to meet the residents’ differing needs. The laundry service needs improving to meet residents’ needs. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection the front conservatory was replaced, new UPVC windows have been fitted throughout the building, six bedrooms and two corridors have been decorated and four bedroom carpets and the carpet in the front conservatory have been replaced. A walk around outside the home confirmed that the external areas have been made safe and accessible for residents and that the required repairs and maintenance of the external doors Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 and windows has taken place. The inspector walked around the home and saw that it was being well maintained and that the fire precautions were being observed. The lighting in some bedrooms was observed to be quite dim. Management has already identified that poor lighting is an issue and more standard lamps have been provided and all 40-watt bulbs are going to be systematically replaced with those of a higher wattage. A faint odour of urine was noticeable in several areas visited. A staff member explained that the replacing of the corridor carpets would address this. Relatives/friends commented, “There does not always appear to be enough arm chairs in the main lounge”. “ The rooms always smell nice.” “I’m pleased X has his own room. He is a very private person”. This year residents have complained about laundry going missing, being spoiled or ruined or washed poorly, dirty laundry left in a room and underwear washed at too high a temperature. Management acknowledge that there have been problems with the laundry due to long-term staff sickness. It is recommended that the laundry arrangements be reviewed so as to improve the standards of this service and to preserve residents’ privacy and dignity. Relatives/friends commented, “They have to use the tumble dryer and name labels come off in it. We do not lose a lot but sometimes we get other people’s washing”. “Sometimes things go missing. I have found X in other’s clothes”. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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): 27,28,29,30. Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home’s staffing levels are adequate to meet residents’ care needs. The home’s robust recruitment procedures ensure that residents are protected from the employment of unsuitable staff. Staff receive the training and support necessary to ensure competency in meeting the residents’ needs. EVIDENCE: There has been a low turnover of staff since the last inspection with only two staff leaving. In an eight-week period 49 shifts were covered by the use of agency staff. This high use of agency staff is due to restrictions placed by Reading Borough Council on filling posts. These restrictions were due to be discontinued the week of this inspection. Whilst these restrictions were in place the provision of respite care was discontinued from January 2006. Staff spoken to confirmed that there are always enough staff on duty. An examination of staff files indicated that staff recruitment procedures are thorough, and that all the required checks are carried out before employment, thereby safeguarding residents. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 All members of staff undergo induction training, upon appointment to their posts, and are offered ongoing training, which equips them to meet the assessed needs of the residents. Staff spoken to about the six-week induction period provided felt that this was adequate and made them feel confident about their practice. Evidence was seen that where a complaint identifies a training need that this is provided promptly. Staff members are encouraged to undertake the National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in care and 98 of care staff have an NVQ level 2 in care, or above. This is very commendable. Staff spoken to about supervisions and appraisals confirmed that these take place at the recommended frequencies. Clients’ comments about the staffing arrangements included –““Staff all very nice and helpful.” “The staff are great – caring. We could not ask for any more.” Relatives/friends spoken to commented, “Staff are an interesting mixture that have different approaches. They do their best. Some are more jolly and outgoing than others. They take such care with everybody”. “The staff are fine. They are always attentive and friendly”. “Staff know what they are doing. They are all very kind. I’m very happy with it all. Everything is very nice”. Staff comments about the staffing arrangements included - “We need more permanent staff”. “I look after my key residents. We get along very well. I take my work seriously. I organise myself well and work as part of a team. I like working here”. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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): 31,33,35,38. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. A highly experienced and well-qualified manager manages the home. Residents are consulted regularly about the running of the home. Clear and robust systems are in place to protect the residents’ financial interests. Residents’ health and safety is promoted and protected. EVIDENCE: The home has a registered manager. She came into the post in January 2006 and has an NVQ level 4 in care and management. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 A Quality of Service Provision Review was conducted recently but the results of these had still to be collated and sent to the CSCI. The home’s administrator looks after residents’ finances. An examination of residents’ financial records and moneys confirmed that these are kept safely, accurately and carefully and there is clear accountability. One relative/friend spoken to commented,” With the money it is all written down and I sign it.” An inspection of records, a walk around the home and discussion with residents and staff confirmed that the health and safety of residents were being protected and that the home was now taking suitable precautions to ensure the home’s fire safety. Regular checks were seen to be undertaken of the home’s equipment and facilities. With the exception of one on emergency and crises all the recommended policies, procedures and codes of practice were reported to be available. Evidence was seen that the home’s facilities are checked regularly for residents’ health and safety. One GP commented, “A good, well managed home”. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 2 3 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 2 X X X X X X 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 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 2 Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? 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 OP1 Regulation 4 Requirement Update the home’s Statement of Purpose to include all the information required by the Regulations. Improve the lighting in the private and the communal areas. Timescale for action 31/01/07 2 OP25 16 31/03/07 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 2 Refer to Standard OP1 OP9 Good Practice Recommendations Update the home’s Service User Guide to give the current contact details of the CSCI. Ensure staff initial any changes made to the medication records, that where variable doses are prescribed the actual number given are recorded, that medication records are checked on arrival to ensure that PRN [when required] medication is shown as such and that spoiled medications for return are locked away in the medication cupboard. Replace the corridor carpets to improve the home’s freshness. Review the laundry arrangements so as to improve the standards of this service. DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 3 4 Arthur Clarke OP19 OP26 5 OP38 Draw up a policy on emergencies and crises. Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Oxford Office Burgner House 4630 Kingsgate Oxford Business Park South Cowley, Oxford OX4 2SU National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Arthur Clarke DS0000039521.V321949.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!