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Please note that the information on this website is now out of date.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 11/05/06 for Charlotte Rose House

Also see our care home review for Charlotte Rose House for more information

This inspection was carried out on 11th May 2006.

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 found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

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

Residents live in a home, which provides a homely atmosphere and where they feel that their privacy and dignity is respected. They are able to make choices and maintain control over their preferred lifestyle and have contact with their family, friends and the local community if they so wish. Residents` feel that their needs are met by sufficient numbers of staff and enjoy the food that is provided for them. Current residents know who to talk to if there was anything that concerned them and feel confident that it would be dealt with quickly. Comments made by the residents included "I`m very happy with the home and the staff" and "the carers know what I like"

What has improved since the last inspection?

Residents` are not being admitted out of the home`s categories of registration and the drugs of residents who self-medicate are stored securely. Specialist training, regarding the common diseases associated with older people, has commenced and the registered provider is now providing monthly reports on the conduct of the home. Smoking in the dining room has now ceased; this activity now occurs in a designated room in the home. Staff application forms have been updated to include a full employment history, although these have not yet been put into use.

What the care home could do better:

Pre-admission assessments and care plans are still not of an acceptable standard; risk assessments must be thorough. Recruitment procedures must be carried out diligently to ensure the safety of the residents. Staff must ensure that drug sheets are signed following the administration of medicines. Staff must ensure that resident`s privacy and dignity is protected at all times and duty rotas must be completed for all members of staff, including the manager. The home`s mobile hoist must be tested every six months to ensure that it is fit for use.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Chaucer House 1 Norwood Road Skegness Lincs PE25 3AD Lead Inspector Mrs Sue Daniells Key Unannounced Inspection 11th May 2006 11:20 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 Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Chaucer House Address 1 Norwood Road Skegness Lincs PE25 3AD 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) 01754 762119 Lonrush Ltd Mrs P D Coulson Care Home 20 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (19), Physical disability (1) of places Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 23rd November 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Chaucer House is a home providing personal care to elderly people over the age of sixty-five. It is situated in the residential outskirts of Skegness within a short car ride of the town centre. Local services within walking distance of the home include hotel-restaurant, post office and shops. The home comprises a detached three-storey building with the accommodation for service users on both ground and first-floor levels. A passenger shaft lift and stair lift has been installed and serves the upper floor. There are fifteen bedrooms, five of which are shared occupancy. The home is registered to provide accommodation for twenty persons, nineteen categorised as old age and one as physically disabled under the age of sixty five. To the front of the premises there is a patio area for sitting out and a small lawned area to the rear. There are no on-site parking facilities for cars although on-street parking is available at the front and side of the home. Current fee rates range from £335.00 to £409.00 per week. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection took place over one day in May 2006. The inspector was in the home for seven hours. The methodology used for the inspection included information taken from the history of the service from the previous inspection to the date of this site visit. This information was reviewed and used to gather evidence to inform the basis of the inspection. Three of the nine residents were “case tracked” – a system that looks at the needs of the resident and follows this through by talking to the residents concerned and the staff who deliver the care. Two members of staff and the registered manager were spoken to. Two other residents and a relative were also spoken to. A sample of regulatory records and policies and procedures were seen and a tour of the premises took place. Further evidence for this report was gained from a visit to the home by the local social services contracting department and visiting health and social care professionals. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 Residents’ are not being admitted out of the home’s categories of registration and the drugs of residents who self-medicate are stored securely. Specialist training, regarding the common diseases associated with older people, has commenced and the registered provider is now providing monthly reports on the conduct of the home. Smoking in the dining room has now ceased; this activity now occurs in a designated room in the home. Staff application forms have been updated to include a full employment history, although these have not yet been put into use. 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. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3. The home does not provide intermediate care. The needs of new residents are not fully assessed prior to admission, which puts them at risk. EVIDENCE: The pre-admission information regarding two new residents were examined. This showed that a comprehensive assessment, including full risk assessments, is still not being documented prior to the residents’ admission, although the residents concerned stated that they had been part of this process. One of these residents had been admitted under the home’s physical disability registration. The names of the staff undertaking the assessment and the dates this occurred were missing from the documents. Both the residents stated that they were happy in the home and with the admission process, although the resident with a physical disability stated that they wished that the other residents were younger. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9 Evidence from the local social services contracting department’s visit to the home also raised issues with lack of information in pre-admission assessments. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9 and 10 Care plans do not reflect all the care needs of the residents, which puts residents at risk. Current residents have their health care needs met, although there is evidence that this was not undertaken in the recent past. More attention is required by staff when administering medication, to avoid errors and protect residents. Residents felt that their privacy and dignity is respected, although again there is evidence that this has not happened in the past. EVIDENCE: Care plans for the three residents case-tracked were examined. These showed that they were not comprehensive in content and that they did not reflect the entire resident’s care needs, with one resident having periods of confusion but this not being documented and all of the care plans giving no direction for care staff to achieve a satisfactory outcome for the resident. Furthermore, risk assessments and moving and handling assessments were not in evidence. Neither was there evidence that the plans had been reviewed on a regular basis, and dates and signatures of entries were often missing. An immediate requirement was made for this to be rectified. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 However, all the service users spoken to were happy with the care they received and very complimentary of the staff, stating, “I’m very happy here” and “the carers know what I like”, although none of them could remember seeing their care plans. A member of staff stated that the care plans “are a mess” and are “difficult to follow”. The manager agreed with this. An immediate requirement was made for this to be rectified. Evidence from the local social services contracting department’s visit to the home, also highlighted that care plans needed attention. The health needs of the residents’ case tracked were examined and it was found that two of the residents required visits from the community nurses on a regular basis. The visits were documented in the care plan, as were visits to the doctor. Residents spoken to stated that when they required a doctor, they asked the manager and she “sorted it out”. Health professionals who visit the home regularly have raised serious concerns regarding the home staff’s ability to undertake their instructions for residents requiring more complex care needs. Furthermore, it was stated that staff at the home had not called health professional quickly enough on one occasion to treat a resident. Currently, one resident is responsible for administering their own inhalers and eye drops, although there was no risk assessment undertaken for the resident. The resident concerned kept the drugs securely, although the inspector queried whether the eye drops should be refrigerated between uses. The manager was going to look into this. A refrigerator for drugs has been ordered; the local chemist verified this. Staff spoken to had undertaken training in the safe administration of medicines, although it was found that three treatment sheets had not always been signed following administration. The residents spoken to were quite happy for staff to handle their drugs. Residents spoken to stated that they always had their privacy and dignity respected and the staff member spoken to described how they would achieve this in the course of their duties. However, a health professional had stated that a former resident of the home was not afforded dignity on an occasion whilst she was visiting which had upset them. One resident’s room door with clear glass, had been covered with a curtain to ensure privacy. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15 Residents are able to exercise choice over their lives and can maintain contact with family, friends and the local community. They are free to choose their own lifestyle and interests as well as the meals that they like, although a more varied diet is currently being formulated with input from the residents. EVIDENCE: The residents spoken to on the day of the inspection stated that they felt satisfied and contented with the lifestyle that they experienced within the home and that they were able to do exactly as they wished each day. One resident is able to attend church every Sunday and a monthly communion service takes place in the home. The relative spoken to stated that they could visit at any time and was always offered a cup of tea. They also stated that the staff were welcoming. A newsletter had been put together by the manager outlining possible trips and activities and asking for examples of dishes they would like to see on the menu. One resident was looking forward to going to the theatre the following week and all the residents spoken to stated that the manager would arrange anything they liked if they asked. Shopping trips are also organised when requested and one resident helps the manager undertake grocery shopping on Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 a regular basis, which they enjoy, although there was no risk assessment for this activity. Menus were limited and one week showed that four roast dinners had been served. However, residents stated that they enjoyed the food “It’s very good and they are good portions”. Only one main course is cooked at lunchtime although there is always a choice for anybody who doesn’t like a particular dish. The manager stated that the residents didn’t like hotpots, stews, or casseroles. The visit by social services contracting department had found the dining room full of cigarette smoke on their visit. On the day of inspection there was no smoke present as one unused bedroom has currently been re-designated as a smoking area. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 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 inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 A copy of the complaints policy and procedure is available in the home and residents know who to approach if they have a problem. Staff were aware of the procedure to follow if they suspected abuse. EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints policy and procedure, which is available to all residents and a copy is placed in the entrance hall. The residents spoken to stated that they had not had any reason to complain, but said that they would approach the manager with any issues that concerned them. The home has a complaints register; no complaints had been logged since the last inspection. The home also has an adult abuse policy, which reflects the fact that the home must follow the most recent Lincolnshire policy and guidelines from February 2005. The member of staff spoken to received adult protection training this year and the manager in 2004. An adult protection issue in the home was raised at the end of March 2006 and was investigated by a social worker and an officer from the local social services contracting department. Some of their findings have been used as evidence in this report; 29 recommendations were made. It was not possible to establish that the home was solely responsible for the incident that occurred. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19 and 26 The home is in need of further work to ensure residents live in a safe and wellmaintained environment at all times. The home is clean and hygienic. EVIDENCE: The home continues to be refurbished on a rolling programme. The contracting officer from social services reported on his visit to the home that “the home’s decor is mixed, in that it is better in some parts than others, although it was noted that there is an ongoing programme of decoration in place. The furniture and fittings were also mixed; the quiet room presented well and contained pleasant furniture. In contrast one of the bedrooms was in need of attention in places” The inspector would agree with this statement and that work is ongoing. The downstairs bathroom was in need of redecoration and upgrading. New carpets were in the process of being laid in some areas of the home. Residents were very happy with the home and stated that it had a “homely” feel about it. They had brought personal memorabilia with them and these were displayed in their rooms. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 A number of radiator covers have been provided in communal areas used by residents and these have been altered to ensure that residents are not at risk if they fell against them, as they are rigid in structure. The manager stated that they would prioritise bedroom radiators until they were all covered. The home does not currently employ cleaners or laundry staff; care staff undertake these duties when they are not busy with the residents. Rooms were clean and dust free and residents were happy with the way the home was cleaned and stated that they didn’t have anything to grumble about. The home had an infection control policy and procedure, which staff were aware of. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29 and 30 Resident’s needs are met by appropriate numbers of staff, although they could be at risk because of recruitment practices. Residents would benefit from a more organised approach to staff training and a more structured and evidenced induction programme. EVIDENCE: Residents were very happy with the care staff and stated that all their needs were met. Dependency levels of the residents were low with a number of them being very independent. Comments about the staff were “I’m very happy with the staff” and “they’re OK” One resident said that they had to wait sometimes for a member of staff to help her to bed. Duty rotas were seen and showed duties for care and ancillary staff. However, the rotas did not show the manager’s hours worked. The cook stated that the manager worked in the kitchen at the weekends, although the manager stated that this was not always the case. The member of care staff on duty at the time of the inspection informed the inspector that there were always two members of staff on duty during day hours with one waking and one “sleep-in” at night-time. This was confirmed by the rota sheets. They also stated that the home is advertising for care staff Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 and the manager said that she would be employing another cook in the near future. Residents have confidence in the staff and the manager. Two staff members have a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in Care at level 3, one has NVQ level 2 and three are undertaking level 2, with another being put forward for level 3. A recruitment policy and procedure is in place, although two of the three staff files that were examined showed that information was missing or not acceptable, eg two references entitled “for whom it may concern”. The member of care staff spoken to informed the inspector that she had received induction training and although there was evidence of this, the content required more structure and evidence of whom had given and received it. Since the last inspection, training on dementia and managing incontinence has taken place; the manager is hopeful that sessions on stroke and diabetes can be accessed from Grimsby College. Information from the report from social services contracting showed that the home does not have a training plan for all the staff – this is undertaken on an ad-hoc basis. “The officers found evidence to indicate that training was taking place in the home. However there is no training plan in place and no audit of training staff have received, has taken place. The manager agreed that these were shortfalls and would take steps to ensure these happened” Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35 and 38 The manager is not discharging her responsibilities in full, not has she the appropriate skills to manage the home. Resident’s financial interests are safeguarded but residents could be at risk if equipment is not maintained regularly. EVIDENCE: Requirements for thorough pre-admission assessments, care planning and safe processes for recruitment of staff, have had to be continuously made in reports for the home. In addition, evidence in this report relating to the outcomes for residents in the section for “Health and Personal Care” shows that their health and welfare needs are not always met. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 The manager informed the inspector that she had completed the Registered Manager’s Award although she was waiting for her course work to be verified. She also stated that she speaks with the staff on a regular basis. Residents and the member of care staff spoken to, felt that the manager was doing a good job and that they could approach her with any problem and she would do her best to sort it out. However, concern has been raised by health professionals over the ability of the manager to deal with residents who require a high level of care in the home, as could be evidenced in the recent adult protection allegation. The manager stated that residents had been sent questionnaire’s within the past week asking their opinions about various aspects of the home; no-one had sent a reply back and residents couldn’t remember anything about the form, although they all thought that she did her best for them. The manager stated that residents, or their relatives, take care of their money themselves; the home does not have any in safe-keeping. Residents spoken to upheld this. Records relating to the passenger lift, fire alarms and equipment were all examined and up-to-date. The hoist however, was due to be tested in November 2005 and this had not been carried out. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 1 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 1 8 1 9 2 10 2 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 1 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 1 X 3 X 3 X X 1 Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes 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 OP3 Regulation 14.1 (a) (c) Requirement Timescale for action 31/05/06 2. OP7 15.1 3. OP29 19.5 (d) Schedule 2 5. OP25 13.4 (b) (c) A comprehensive assessment must be undertaken for all residents prior to admission, with the input of the resident and/or their representative. Timescales of 31.08.05 and 31.01.06 not met. Care plans must be complete, 30/06/06 comprehensive in content and cover all the care needs for each resident. They must also detail the care that is required and each document must be dated and signed. Timescale of 31/01/06 not met. All the information as detailed in 31/05/06 Schedule 2 must be obtained for each member of staff, prior to their employment. Timescales of 31.08.05 and 31/12/05 not met. All residents must have a full risk 19/05/06 assessment undertaken to ensure that any preventative action that is required is put in place, including risk of injury falling against a hot radiator. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 5. OP7 13.4 (b) (c) 6. OP7 15 (2) (b) All residents must have a full risk 19/05/06 assessment undertaken to ensure that any preventative action that is required is put in place, including risk of injury falling against a hot radiator. Care plans must be reviewed on 19/05/06 a regular basis and always when a resident’s needs change. The person administering medication must sign the medication sheets immediately after a resident has taken their medication. The registered person must ensure that resident’s privacy and dignity is protected at all times. Duty rotas must be completed for all members of staff working in the home, including the manager. The home’s mobile hoist must be passed fit for use every six months under the LOLER Regulations. the next being by the date shown The registered manager must ensure that health professional’s help is sought for all residents requiring it and in a timely way. Any request by a health professional to a member of the home’s staff, in relation to the care of a resident, must be carried out. 11/05/06 7. OP9 Schedule 3 17.1 (a) 8. OP10 12.4 (a) 31/05/06 19. OP27 17 (2) Schedule 4. 7 13.4 (c) 31/05/06 10 OP38 31/05/06 11 OP8 13.1 (a) (b) 31/05/06 Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24 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 OP30 Good Practice Recommendations It is highly recommended as good practice that induction for all new staff is comprehensive and documented, with evidence of the trainer and the trainee being part of that process. Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Lincoln Area Office Unity House, The Point Weaver Road Off Whisby Road Lincoln LN6 3QN 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 Chaucer House DS0000034355.V294148.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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!