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Please note that the information on this website is now out of date.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 17/12/05 for Bridge Court Bungalow

Also see our care home review for Bridge Court Bungalow for more information

This inspection was carried out on 17th 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.

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

Bridge Court Bungalow is well decorated, has nice furniture and is homely. Residents have a healthy diet and are given help and support from staff if they need it. Staff know what to do if they think someone has not been treated properly and they understand how to help and support residents.

What has improved since the last inspection?

The home had two areas where they had to improve. One was that resident`s plans that have their goals in them should be dated and this had been done. The other was that proper gadgets to hold bedroom doors open needed to be fixed in place where needed, instead of doors being kept open by chairs or other things. These were in place, however, one of these needs to be repaired as it was damaged, as it is very important in making sure that residents are kept safe.

What the care home could do better:

The home must give good information about how to complain to residents. Staff training must get better as there is a lot of areas that they have not had training in and they must also have more staff qualified, including the manager, so that they can improve and be safer in the way they look after residents. The home must make sure they get the views of relatives and other important people who are involved with residents in order that they can continue to improve the way the home runs.

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Bridge Court Bungalow Bridge Court High Street Normanby Middlesbrough TS6 OLD Lead Inspector Shaun Common Unannounced Inspection 17th December 2005 1:00 Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.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 Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.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. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Bridge Court Bungalow Address Bridge Court High Street Normanby Middlesbrough TS6 OLD 01642 463356 01642 463356 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) londonroad@tiscali.co.uk Milbury Care Services Limited Mr Geoffrey Sirs Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Learning disability (6) registration, with number of places Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 18th April 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Bridge Court Bungalow is a modern purpose-built property situated in a quiet cul-de-sac off Normanby High Street. Accommodation is provided in six single bedrooms, none having an en-suite facility but all meeting the spatial requirements of the National Minimum Standards. The bungalow has its own private garden and residents are able to access the more extensive grounds of Bridge House (another Milbury home for people with learning disabilities on the same site). The home is within easy walking distance of local community facilities: Church; shops; public houses etc. The public transport system provides direct access to the coast, countryside and Middlesbrough town centre. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection of Bridge Court Bungalow. The inspection took place on a Saturday afternoon. All residents were present during the inspection. The visit started at 1pm and lasted three hours. The inspector spoke to residents, staff and looked at records as well as looking around the home. 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. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 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 Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 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): Choice of home was not assessed at this inspection. EVIDENCE: Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 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): Residents assessed needs are reviewed and planning up to date. EVIDENCE: Choice of Home was examined at the last inspection. Only a recommendation that was evident in the last inspection report was re-visited. Two residents files were examined and goal plans were noted to be dated. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 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): 17 Residents are provided with a healthy diet. EVIDENCE: The home has menus in place that demonstrate a varied diet is offered and provided. One resident spoke to the inspector and confirmed he had a varied diet and was able to choose meals and snacks. It was noted that two residents are on cooking courses at a local college. Observations demonstrated that residents have access to drinks and snacks and staff advised that they support residents in making these and meals. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 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): Personal Healthcare and Support was not assessed at this inspection. EVIDENCE: Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 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 & 23 Residents know how to complain; however the complaints information given to residents is lacking. An effective Adult Protection procedure understood by staff helps keep residents safe. EVIDENCE: Complaints information given to resident’s contained the outline of how to complain, but no contact details of people within the organisation, CSCI or others as appropriate. Residents spoken to were aware of how to complain, but unsure of how to contact CSCI. The home has in place an appropriate Adult Protection Procedure and a copy of the ‘No Secrets’ guidance. There have been no referrals in the last year. One member of staff interviewed, was aware of the procedure to follow should she suspect an incident of abuse had occurred in the home. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 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): 24, 26 & 30 The home provides an environment conducive to the care of residents. EVIDENCE: A tour of the home was undertaken. In the main, Bridge Court Bungalow was noted to be homely, well set out, well decorated and comfortably furnished. The flooring in the main bathroom was damaged and coming away near the bath. This required replacing. In the shower room, the shower was out of action due to water damage. The senior support worker advised that both these tasks had been referred to the maintenance department for action. The flooring in the toilet was noted to be marked and stained. This required to be made good or replaced. Bedrooms were noted to be personalised and again well decorated and furnished. The home was noted to be clean and hygienic throughout. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 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): 32, 34 & 35 Staff are aware of residents needs and how to meet these needs, however are not sufficient qualified or trained. Information regarding checks that keeps residents safe is mostly in place. EVIDENCE: Staff files were examined and two staff interviewed. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of residents assessed needs and how these were to be met on a day-to-day basis. Five from fifteen care staff are qualified to NVQ Level 2, which is below the 50 required. There are shortfalls in staff training including; Moving and Handling, Dealing with and Managing Challenging Behaviour, Equal Opportunities and Diversity and Adult Protection/No Secrets. The senior support worker stated that all staff had recently completed LDAF (Learning Disability Award Framework) training, however certificates were not available to evidence this. Two staff personnel files demonstrated that all information was available on both files as required, however the CRB information on one of these files did not determine the level of the disclosure and the client group for which the disclosure was carried out. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 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): 37, 39 & 42 The manager is appropriately experienced, but not qualified. assurance system is not robust. EVIDENCE: The Registered Manager is undergoing the relevant qualifications and hopes to complete these by March 2006. The manager has relevant experience in order to carry out his role. The home did have questionnaires in place from residents that gave their views on the operation of he home. There were also audit reports from Regulation 26 monitoring visits carried out by the organisation. There was no information available that determined that stakeholders, resident’s families etc had been asked their opinions. There was an annual development plan in place. The quality Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 One resident’s bedroom door had a magnetic door closure fitted, however this had been damaged and was awaiting repair, this door was propped open. Another bedroom door was also propped open, however an explanation was given regarding the ongoing problem around this. Staff continue to monitor and take action as appropriate in line with the risk assessment. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 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 3 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 3 X X X X Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 2 X 3 X X X 3 LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X 16 X 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score X 2 X 2 2 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Bridge Court Bungalow Score X X X X Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 X 2 X X 2 X DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 No 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 22 Regulation 22 Requirement The home must have in place a complaints procedure that includes contact details of CSCI. Information about complaints provided to residents must be robust. The flooring in the main bathroom that is damaged and coming away must be replaced. The shower and its surrounding utilities must be repaired. The flooring in the toilet is marked and stained. This must be made good or replaced. 50 of staff must be qualified to NVQ Level 2. CRB disclosures/information held on staff personnel files must demonstrate the level of the disclosure and the client group for which the disclosure was obtained (i.e. demonstrate POVA checks). The Responsible Individual and Registered Manager must ensure that foundation and subsequent training is provided to staff in order that essential skills are attained to deliver the homes DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 02/02/06 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 24 24 24 32 34 23 23 23 18 19 02/02/06 02/02/06 02/02/06 01/06/06 17/12/05 7. 35 18 16/02/06 Bridge Court Bungalow Version 5.0 Page 18 statement of purpose. A plan of how this is to be achieved, with timescales must be developed, retained in the home and submitted to CSCI as part of the homes action plan to address this report. The home’s quality assurance 31/03/06 monitoring system must contain all the elements set out in the Standard. A damaged magnetic closer must 02/02/06 be repaired. 8. 39 24 9. 42 13 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard YA37 Good Practice Recommendations The manager must be qualified to NVQ Level 4 in Management and Care. Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 Commission for Social Care Inspection Tees Valley Area Office Advance St. Marks Court Teesdale Stockton-on-Tees TS17 6QX 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 Bridge Court Bungalow DS0000000110.V272530.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 - 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!