Inspection on 12/09/05 for Checaniah House

This inspection was carried out on 12th September 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 found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report. These are things the inspector asked to be changed, but found they had not done. The inspector also made 4 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Checaniah House 07/11/06

Checaniah House 06/03/06

Checaniah House 02/02/05

Checaniah House 18/05/04

Similar services:

Ashlong House

Norbury Crescent (30)

Edenvale

Wadham Avenue

Chatsworth Care - Dawson House

Cowden Road, 52 - 54

Chatsworth Care - Tudor Lodge

Foxley Lane (121a)

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Checaniah House 26 Chailey Street London E5 0RX Lead Inspector Sandra Jacobs-Walls Unannounced Inspection 12th September 2005 10:00 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Checaniah House Address 26 Chailey Street London E5 0RX 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) 020 8533 5400 020 7533 5400 Mrs Joanita Tuitt Mrs Joanita Tuitt Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Learning disability (3) registration, with number of places Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 2nd February 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Checaniah House is a small care home that offers support, personal care and accommodation to a maximum of three (younger) adults who have learning difficulties. The home’s premises are a large three bedroom terraced house in a residential area of Clapton within the London Borough of Hackney. The home is walking distance from local shops, a park, market and amenities. Local bus links are good. At the time of the inspection, the three service users who were living at Checaniah House at the last inspection (conducted in February 2005) were still accommodated by the home. One service user was present at the home during this inspection and met briefly with the inspector. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The unannounced inspection was conducted on September 12th 2005. One service user was home at the time and the inspector met with her very briefly. The deputy/operational manager of the home assisted with the inspection process, which included review of two service user files, key policies and procedures and other documentation, interview with staff and the review of staff personnel files. The inspector also was accompanied on a tour of the home. It was clear to the inspector that the three current service users living at the home were extremely well known to staff and had identified needs well met by the service. Checaniah House continues to offer good quality care. As a result of the inspection, four requirements and no recommendations were made. The inspector would like to thank all service users and staff who contributed and co-operated with the inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The inspector noted that most of the outstanding requirements made at the last inspection had been addressed satisfactorily. The home has a newly developed service user guide and communications book that conveys information pictorially. This will be of great benefit to the home’s current and any prospective service users. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 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. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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): 1&5 No new service users had been admitted to the home for a number of years, so standards 2,3 & 4 were not assessed on this occasion. Prospective service users have information to help determine choice, however information available is in need of revision. Each service user had a written contract. EVIDENCE: The inspector saw the home’s newly developed service user guide, which had been reformatted from previously written literature to more accessible pictorial form. This information however, must include details of the home’s complaints procedure. The inspector noted that for the two service user files seen, both contained signed written contracts. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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): 6,7,8,9 & 10. Service users’ changing needs and goals were reflected in their care plans. Staff consult with service users, who then make decisions about their lives. Risk assessments are in place and service user information is maintained confidentially. EVIDENCE: The two service user files seen by the inspector both contained current care plan that staff adhered to. Files also contained appropriate, individual risk assessments and the operational manager gave good examples of how service users were encouraged to make decisions for themselves and participate in activities in the home. The inspector was aware and observed for herself staff sensitively consult with the service user who was present at the home during the inspection in asking what she wanted to do, whether she wanted to go out and what she wanted for lunch etc. Risk assessments seen on file addressed individual needs, for example one service user risk assessment highlighted the need for staff to be vigilant while the service user was walking due the risk of her falling. The home has in place a confidentiality policy, offering good guidance to staff. All files were kept locked in a cabinet in the staff office. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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): 11,12,13,14,15,16 & 17 Service users have opportunities for personal development and to participate in appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community and engage in leisure pursuits. There is very good contact between service users and their family members; service users rights are well respected and they are offered healthy meal choices. EVIDENCE: All service users attend local day centres; two service users attend different day centres five days a week. Reports seen on file indicated that a range of activities was offered to service users and there is ample opportunity for social networking and personal development. In addition to attending day centres, the home also offered service users a variety of activities. The inspector saw on file information outlining activities service users had participated in these included frequent local walks, film video watching, the use of board games and some service users attended church regularly. Service user’s family members and friends are proactively encouraged to maintain contact and visit service users at home and the staff is commended for efforts in this aspect of the home’s services. One service user visits his mother on a weekly basis, while staff also supported another service user to Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 visit family members. Care plans were explicit in highlighting the importance of maintaining family contact; the inspector was pleased to note that staff keenly liaised with family members of all three service users. The inspector also noted that two service users had recently celebrated their birthdays. In both instances, family members and friends had been invited to attend birthday parties held at Checaniah House. Individual case files seen also detailed meals offered to service users. Menu choices were varied and nutritious, and took into account service users known preferences. One file stated that the service user; “ ….doesn’t like ravioli and not too keen on baked beans. He doesn’t like hot drinks, tea, coffee etc.” The inspector noted that for one service user, low calorie options were offered in accordance with plans to help with weight loss and written guidance was given to address another service user’s habit of eating food very rapidly. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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): 18,19,20 & 21 Service users personal care support is conducted in accordance to their preference. Their physical and emotional health needs are well met and their medication is safely administered. The home has a death and dying policy in place. EVIDENCE: In reviewing two service user files in detail, the inspector was pleased to note good written guidance to staff outlining how service users preferred their personal care tasks to be conducted. One file entry stated that the service user was “…able to toilet herself, but needs prompting…… washing and bathing, she needs support and encouragement.” Service users’ emotional wellbeing was also well addressed by staff. The inspector noted that one service user had been referred to mental health specialist following significant change in his behaviour when distressed. Service users and their ‘habits’ are well known to staff, the inspector saw the following statement about the emotional state of one service user, noted as being, Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 “…happy and healthy, but can show sadness if mum does not visit” The health care needs of service users were also very well addressed. Each service user has a detailed health plan in place that outlined individual health care needs and how these were to be addressed. The home has a sound medication policy in place. The inspector reviewed the medication details for one service user and found appropriate and accurate recording of medication information. The operational manager demonstrated good knowledge of changes made to service users’ medication by the appropriate mental health specialist. The home also has a death and dying policy in place, the inspector noted on file that the next of kin for one service user had given instructions to staff about her wishes in the event of the service user’s death occurring after that of her own. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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 & 23 Service users views are listened to and acted upon, however the home’s new Service User Guide must also contain details of the home’s complaints procedure. Service users are well protected from abuse, neglect and harm, but staff must have access to local adult protection protocols. EVIDENCE: The home has received no complaints against the service for a significant length of time. The inspector reviewed the home’s written complaints procedure, which was satisfactory. However the newly developed Service User Guide, which is now available in pictorial form, did not contain information about the complaints procedure, as required. The home also has an effective adult protection procedure in place. However staff did not have access on site to local joint adult protection procedures issued by London Borough of Hackney Learning Difficulties Team, which details standard local procedures to be followed by the professionals involved. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.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): 24,25,26,27,28 and 30 The home is suitably maintained for its stated purpose and was clean and hygienic. Service users’ bedrooms met service users needs and promoted their independence. Toilets and bathrooms are private and also meet individual needs. Shared areas are adequate in space and appropriately equipped. EVIDENCE: The inspector participated in a tour of the home, which was very clean and hygienic. The home in general is very homely, comfortable and safe. Communal areas, like the kitchen, lounge and garden areas, are well maintained and equipped with appropriate materials. The living room is comfortably decorated, has a fish tank, TV and audio equipment. The kitchen area was domestically styled and also well equipped. The garden area is particularly pleasant and used by service users when the weather is good. The inspector met briefly with one service user who was enjoying sitting in the garden area at the time of the inspection. The service user gave some indication that she was happy with the home and her bedroom in particular. The operational manager commented that there were plans for the home to hold a barbeque in the garden before the end of summer. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 All three service user bedrooms were seen by the inspector. Bedrooms were clean, well-lit and ventilated and contained appropriate furniture and evidence of service users’ personal effects such as photos, posters and stuffed toys. The home’s bathrooms/toilets were private and sufficient in number, however it was noted that the ground floor toilet, near the garden area was in need of some decoration due to a recent water leak. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 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): 31,32,33,34,35 & 36 Staff were clear of their roles and responsibilities and service users are supported by competent staff, who worked effectively and are well supervised. The home’s recruitment practices are generally sound, although staff personnel records must evidence all required information. EVIDENCE: The inspector met with both the members of staff on shift at the time of the inspection. The inspector was satisfied that staff were competent and aware of their role and responsibilities. Staff personnel files reviewed contained job descriptions and evidence of relevant training such as first aid and manual handling. The inspector was informed that other staff training (fire safety, health care planning) was scheduled for forthcoming weeks. Staff spoke openly about the good morale of the staff team, effective communication and their ability to meet well service users’ identified needs. This was also very evident in documentation seen in service user files. One staff member interviewed said, “I get on well with other staff, even when I‘m not working, I give them a call and say, “How are the residents?” ” It was clear that the staff team were committed to offering quality care to service users, the care staff member interviewed said “Here, you feel like home, you take the residents as your own” Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 Staff are supported by individual supervision and staff meetings, both of which were held regularly; the inspector saw documented evidence to support this view. The inspector reviewed three staff personnel files and was satisfied that the home’s recruitment policies were generally satisfactory. However one staff file seen, failed to contain proof of identity as required. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 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 home is well run and service users benefit from effective leadership, management and self monitoring of services offered. Managers are competent and service user’s rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are well protected and the home’s record keeping is good. EVIDENCE: The inspector saw good evidence that Checaniah House is efficient managed and well run. Case files reviewed were well maintained and documented, service users needs were appropriately addressed and the skills and abilities of the home’s managers are sound. Managers of the home had recently completed relevant management training. Staff work very effectively as a team and there had been no record of any significant (negative) event, or any accident having occurred since the last inspection. The home has good fire safety precautions in place, which were evidenced and the overall atmosphere of the home was very positive. Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 22 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 2 X X X 3 Standard No 22 23 Score 2 2 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 3 3 3 3 3 Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 2 3 3 3 3 N/A 3 LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 4 16 3 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score 3 3 3 3 3 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Checaniah House Score 3 3 3 3 Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 YES 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 YA1, 22 Regulation 5(1) Requirement The registered manager must ensure that the Service User Guide is revised to include details of the home’s complaints procedure and the telephone number of the local CSCI office The registered manager must ensure that staff have access on site to local authority adult protection protocols The registered manager must ensure that the ground floor toilet is appropriately decorated. The registered manager must ensure that all staff personnel records contain proof of identity as required by Schedule 2 of the Care Homes Regulations. Timescale for action 01/11/05 2 YA23 13(6) 01/11/05 3 4 YA24 YA34 23(1)(b) 19(1)(b) 01/12/05 30/09/05 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection East London Area Office Gredley House 1-11 Broadway Stratford London E15 4BQ 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 Checaniah House DS0000010262.V249465.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 25 - 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!