Please note that the information on this website is now out of date.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 03/11/08 for Chrissian Residential Home Limited
Also see our care home review for Chrissian Residential Home Limited for more information
This inspection was carried out on 3rd November 2008.
CSCI found this care home to be providing an Good service.
The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 2 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.
Other inspections for this house
Chrissian Residential Home... 24/02/09
Chrissian Residential Home... 29/08/07
Chrissian Residential Home... 29/08/06
Chrissian Residential Home... 17/12/05
Chrissian Residential Home... 10/06/05
Similar services:
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
The annual service review said there had been concerns expressed from staff and relatives about the lack of activities on offer. In response the manager wrote to us to say that `we do entertain the residents on a Thursday afternoon`. And that he would go on to survey residents and staff about activities/entertainment. This matter was looked at during inspection. People we spoke with confirmed that entertainment was provided on a Thursday and this tended to be bingo as it was a favourite of the residents. The manager had conducted a survey and was in the process of looking at the results. One very positive development was that a staff member had enrolled upon a course at a local college entitled `Promotion of activities in a care setting`. We fed back to the manager that we would expect to see activities on offer each day based upon residents preferences. A previous requirement we had made was to review the use of bedsides as a resident had climbed over these. We found that the home no longer uses bedsides and had found an alternative way of managing the situation. There were two people currently at the home who were at risk of falling out of bed and in these cases specific thick `crash mats` were placed at the side of the bed should they roll out out bed. This method allowed freedom of movement out of bed and allow the residents to sit up whilst keeping them safe in the event of falling out of bed. The manager told us that in response to our requirement around lockable facilities to be provided. The home had purchased safes to go in bedrooms for residents to keep possessions and money secure. The laundry floor had been recovered and now was able to be cleaned thoroughly. Environmentally there had been decoration of communal areas and both lounges had a flat screen TV and new stereos installed for use by residents.
What the care home could do better:
Chrissian House had information available about the service entitled Statement of Purpose. The manager explained that this was one document available to all. This however did not contain the terms and conditions and the fees. The manager said he would amend this. We fed back to the manager our concerns around manual handling as currently the home is not protecting residents and staff as well as it could do. We found that 8 staff had not had training. Training was provided to some staff in 2006. We looked at a certificate of that training and found that it did cover the training we would expect, such as legislation, demonstrations and a duty to use the equipment provided. We spoke with 3 staff about manual handling and staff were reticent to discuss the matter, but one staff member did say that on occasions a resident was lifted by 2 staff. We looked at the care plans of 2 dependent residents who would on occasion needed to be aided to move. There was no manual handling plans in place. We looked at the equipment in the home and found a Nesbit Evans Hoist. This had a label that appeared to indicate that it belonged to Suffolk Social Services. We asked 3 people at the home and no one in the home could say where the hoist came from. The manager agreed to look into this. We did however find evidence that this hoist was being serviced by the home. It had a medium sized sling that would take up to 27 stone. The ambulance service had notified us that the home did not have equipment to lift a person from the floor once they had attended and said the person was not injured. We looked at the accident record and found that this named individual had fallen 6 times this year and their falls risk assessment had not been reviewed and there was no manual handling plan in place for staff to follow to get this person up should they fall again. Ten days after our visit the manager told us by telephone that he had referred this person through the GP to the falls clinic and they were being assessed and appropriate action taken to prevent falls and a hoist was to be provided on the first floor. The home needs to review care needs around manual handling, falls prevention and then provide the appropriate equipment to meet those needs and train the staff accordingly.