Inspection on 22/09/08 for Conifer Lodge

This inspection was carried out on 22nd September 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

Conifer Lodge 23/10/07

Conifer Lodge 06/06/06

Conifer Lodge 08/11/05

Conifer Lodge 12/07/05

Similar services:

Coopers Mill Ltd

Bramley Avenue (73)

Paradise Lodge

Grangewood

Upaya Ananda

Newton Court (1-2)

Kings Lane (32)

Pemdale

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/11/2008.

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Conifer Lodge 134 North Brink Wisbech Cambridgeshire PE13 1LL Lead Inspector Elaine Boismier Unannounced Inspection 22nd September 2008 10:50 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.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 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. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Conifer Lodge Address 134 North Brink Wisbech Cambridgeshire PE13 1LL 01945 474912 01945 583951 john.baker@erminecare.com 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) Ermine Care Ltd Care Home 15 Category(ies) of Learning disability (15) registration, with number of places Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 23rd October 2007 Brief Description of the Service: Conifer Lodge is an adapted two-storey domestic dwelling situated on the outskirts of the Cambridgeshire market town of Wisbech and is in walking distance from the town centre. Local amenities include shops, pubs and leisure facilities. The home provides accommodation care and support for a maximum number of 15 people, between 18 and 65 years of age, with a learning disability. All bedrooms have ensuite facilities and are for single occupancy. In addition to the ensuite facilities the home provides 3 toilets and has two bathrooms. There are two communal rooms and a large garden that provides space for games and gardening activities. Care Principles Ltd is the registered owner of Ermine Care Ltd, the registered provider of Conifer Lodge. Current fees range from approximately £1647 to £2175.37 per week. Further information about the fees can be obtained from the home. Additional costs include those for toiletries, cigarettes and contributions to holidays. A copy of the inspection report is available at the home or via the CSCI website at www.csci.org.uk Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 2 star. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes. We, The Commission for Social Care Inspection carried out this key unannounced inspection between 10:50 and 15:50, taking 5 hours to complete. We spoke with some of the residents and some of the staff and we observed activities taking place. We had a look around the premises and examined documentation. Several weeks before our inspection we sent out surveys to the home although we were told, the residents and the staff had received none of these. We also sent out an Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA) with these surveys and, because this, too, had not been received, we sent another of these AQAAs just before our inspection. We have also looked at the information we have received, since our last inspection in October 2007, about the home. For the purpose of this inspection people who live at Conifer Lodge are referred to as “people”, “person” or “residents/s”. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Both of the requirements have been met. These requirements were regarding safe administration of medication and the training of staff in fire safety. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1 & 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. The information about the home needs to be updated and easier to understand for prospective residents to assist them in their decision where to live. There are good systems in place to ensure that the home is a suitable place to meet the needs of prospective residents. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: At our inspection, in October 2007, we noted that the age range of people admitted to the home was not in accordance with the 2006 Statement of Purpose (SOP) that states the home is for younger people. Currently the home provides care for both young and “middle” aged people. The current SOP also includes the name of the former home manager. According to the current home Manager both the SOP and Service User’s Guide is being reviewed to ensure that the information about the home is current and in formats appropriate to the residents’ range of abilities of understanding. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Since our last inspection, in October 2007, there have been no admissions to the home. According to the Manager he has carried out assessments of prospective residents but these assessments demonstrated that the home was not a suitable place to admit these people. This included such criteria as the home environment (that is unsuitable for people needing assistance to mobilise in a wheelchair) and the “matching” of other residents’ care and mental needs and personalities with the prospective residents’ level of care and mental health needs. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. People are supported in having their needs met and making decisions about what they choose to do within a framework of managed risk. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Examination of two people’s care records was carried out and the detail within these records was of a very high standard. The information was person centred and provided clear guidance on how people’s assessed needs and assessed risks were to be met and managed respectively. Information provided evidence that both care plans and risk assessments were drawn up and agreed by the residents. The care plans were actively reviewed each month and any updated information, such as management of new risks, was included in these records. The risk assessments, and observation of the activities of the people, indicated that the risk assessments were managed to allow people a safe level of independence. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Observation of the staff interaction with the people and during our discussion with some of the people, indicated that people were supported in making decisions, such as going out, making a meal or having control over their personal money. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 11,12,13,14,15,16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. People are provided with opportunities to live an excellent quality of life. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: According to the Manager, and this was confirmed in our examination of people’s care records, people have access to counselling/therapeutic services such as psychiatric and clinical psychology services to help any of the residents with complex mental health and psychological needs. Some of the people were out at college and information provided in the care records indicated that the home supports people in accessing educational facilities. People we spoke with and examination of some of the care records indicated that the home is part of the local community, accessing local shops, cafes, a cinema and gymnasium. According to the Manager, the staff are encouraged to Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 plan weekly activities for the residents and these were recorded on a notice board with the main office. The staff felt that there was some restriction with arranging activities, in a spontaneous manner, other than those that were planned-for example going to the coast when the weather was good. According to the Manager this was not the case and he would discuss the current planning and arrangement of activities again with the staff. The home provides money for a minimum of one holiday a year for each resident. Discussion with the staff and one of the people indicated that people have the opportunities to go on holiday with the support of staff, family and friends. Holidays taken, and planned for, include visits to a Butlins holiday camp and to coastal town of Great Yarmouth. Discussion with the staff, with some of the residents and examination of documentation, including a roster and minutes of a residents’ meeting held in June 2008, indicated that people are encouraged to help with the daily routines of the home to include cleaning of their room, washing up, laying the dining tables and cleaning the residents’ communal (food) fridge. One person we spoke with said that they had a key to their own room and we saw that this was the case. Both the staff and the people told us that residents are encouraged to shop and prepare meals with the support of the staff and we saw that lunch was being prepared by a resident and a member of the staff. Menus were seen and there was a range of food available. The residents’ meetings have records of people’s suggestions one of which was for residents to have a take away meal at least once per month. During the inspection, due to the absence of kitchen staff, some of the people were asked if they would like fish and chips as a take away meal. The staff considered that the offer of a take away meal was because the kitchen staff were not available, rather than it a planned activity. According to the Manager, the staff are encouraged to offer the residents a choice of a take away meal particularly at weekends and that he would remind the staff about this. According to the staff there has been a reduced budget for food, following the take over of the home by Care Principles Ltd and they believed that this reduction allowed under £3 per person per day for food. With the Manager we examined the monthly budget for food and calculated that the current 12 residents are allocated £7.42 per day for food. People we spoke with said that they liked the food and enjoyed shopping for it. A copy of the report, made by a representative of the registered owner, following a visit to the home during May 2008 said,” There was a menu available; the lunch today was pasta and salad, this was thoroughly enjoyed, there were alternatives on offer also. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 This was being enjoyed by the residents and the staff. The kitchen was clean and tidy, a full audit was carried out yesterday by the Corporate Catering Manager, this was very good and all staff should be very proud of the result. There is evidence that the residents are having shopping days and also the time to cook for both themselves and others, this forms part of their life skills.” Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. People can be confident that they receive good health and personal care and are safer from improved medication practices. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Discussion with the people, observation of their activities and examination of some of the people’s care records indicated that the people are encouraged to be as independent as possible with their personal care and are supported and encouraged by staff to maintain their personal hygiene, including a change of clothes before going out of the home. The care records indicated that the staff have responded appropriately to incidents caused by people becoming distressed and upset. Information also provided in the care records indicated that people have access to psychiatric and clinical psychology services, general practitioners and dentists. A requirement was made about the secondary assemblage of medication. Following our inspection, in October 2007, we were informed that action had been taken to ensure that no staff carried out this unsafe practice. During this inspection staff, unsolicited, told us that any medication that a resident needs Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 when they are away from the home, is dispensed by the local pharmacy. This requirement has been met. An air conditioner has been installed in the room where medication is kept, thereby ensuring medication is stored at the right temperature. Records of the room temperature, since the installation of the air conditioner in July/August 2008, indicated that the quality of the medication is protected, due to the safe levels of the temperature of the air in the medication room. Stock levels of medication were, on the whole, of an acceptable level, with the exception of fybogel and tegretol. This indicates that there is not a complete control of the amount of medication coming into the home and, as a result, there is a risk of medication being given beyond its expired date. We expect the home to manage this. Both the Manager and the staff told us that medication training is arranged and following this training, people will have a risk assessment in carrying out selfmedication practices. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 &23 Quality in this outcome area is good. People are listened to and there are good systems in place to reduce the risk of abuse. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: We have received no complaint made against the home. Examination of the complaints record indicated that there has been no formal complaint made against the home, since our inspection in October 2007. We noted that a person had made a written complaint to the Manager and we saw that action had been taken, the day after the complaint had been written. The people we spoke with knew who their key worker was and felt that they could speak with them if they were unhappy about something. We are satisfied, from our information about the home, that the home has followed correct safeguarding reporting procedures. (Safeguarding was previously called protection of vulnerable adults or POVA). Care records, including risk assessments were updated following any safeguarding issue. Although the staff said that they had not attended any safeguarding training within the last 12 months they were able to say what they would do if they witnessed an incident of abuse against a resident. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 A copy of the report, made by a representative of the registered owner, following a visit to the home during May 2008, told us,” The resident monies have been checked for auditing purposes, there is a robust system in place, which shows that the money is not only checked when monies are taken out/in, but the administrator does audit all accounts at least twice a month.” Two people’s personal monies were counted and the amount reconciled with the associated recorded balances. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. People live in a home that could be better maintained and safer. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: According to the staff there is often a delay, by Care Principles Ltd, to approve requests for maintenance. This included a request for maintenance, sent in January 2008, for a resident’s shower/toilet floor to be repaired. During this inspection we saw that this area posed a risk to the resident as the floor was in a state of collapse and the floor covering had risen up, thereby posing a risk of tripping. According to the staff, that, although overdue, the home had received approval, from Care Principle’s Ltd, to have maintenance work done in this shower/toilet area. In the report of the inspection of October 2007 we wrote “We noted that two floors, one in the conservatory area and one in the lounge area, had holes in the floor covering. The Manager explained that this was due to furniture damaging the floor covering. It was reported to us, however, that action has been taken, to improve the floor covering.” Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 We spoke with the staff and we saw that a request had been submitted, in January 2008, for these areas to be addressed. We noted in this inspection, that no action had been taken. In addition the carpet in the office area had a black and yellow hazard strip. The surface beneath this was uneven and we saw some of the residents coming in and going out of the office. A black and yellow hazard strip was placed over one of the kitchen windows and we were told that this was due to a stone hitting the window that since needed replacing. The garden was overgrown with weeds and the grass was in need of a mow. A wooden bench was broken although both the staff and a resident said that this was broken over the preceding weekend. We have made a requirement for people to be safer and to have their dignity respected by ensuring the maintenance of the internal and external areas of the home are better maintained. The vegetable patch remained in a state of neglect although the staff have informed us that this area is to be used for a proposed new drainage/sewer system. Carpets were generally clean with the exception of the residents’ quiet room, which was stained and dirty, looking. We expect the home to manage this issue. Other areas of the home were generally clean and there were no offensive odours. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34 & 35 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. People receive care from staff who are better trained although people are at risk due to the standard of recruitment practices. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: During our last inspection the staff told us that their morale was low following the change of ownership of the home. During this inspection the staff felt that there had been no improvement in the level of their morale and considered that there were two main causes for this feeling, namely lack of timely responsiveness to maintenance requests, from the registered owner and the level of communication within the home. (Examples of this have been cited in this report). Such a level of staff morale poses some risk to the safe protection of the residents. Although staff told us about how they felt they told us that they were committed to caring for the residents and we found this to be the case due to the level of support provided and activities occurring in and out of the home. One person said they liked the staff as “They talked to you.” Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 The Manager informed us that the home has above 50 of staff with a National Qualification in Care (NVQ) level 2 or equivalent. According to him, he is arranging for other staff to attend NVQ training with a college located in Cambridge. Two staff recruitment files were seen and it was noted that the application form used does not ask for the dates of an applicant’s employment history, although the interview record format does. Neither of the interview notes was completed in this area. Other required information was available in one of the two files that we saw. For the 2nd file the information provided in the application form was inconsistent with the results of the criminal record disclosure. Furthermore one of the two written references was unsatisfactory as it posed questions about the suitability of the person to work with vulnerable people in care. A requirement has been made to ensure that full and satisfactory information about staff is obtained before they are allowed to work at the home, ensuring that people are protected from the risk of harm from unsuitable staff. The staff told us that opportunities for their training has improved following the appointment of the Manager. According to the Manager he has been given an “unlimited” budget for training. The staff told us, and examination of some of their training files, indicated that health and safety training has been attended (see Standard 42 of this report). Other training arranged includes that for medication practices and procedures. The staff were unclear if arrangements are in place for staff to attend refresher training in managing people’s challenging behaviours. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is good. People benefit from a generally well-managed home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The Manager was appointed to his present post on the 30th June 2008. Written information, provided by a representative of Care Principles Ltd, told us that the Manager is intending to apply to be the registered manager of Conifer Lodge and he confirmed that this was the case. He qualified in 2004 as a registered nurse for learning disability and has a degree in chemistry. His previous care experience is that of working in private hospitals for people with learning disabilities. Following his appointment we have noted that there is an improvement in the training of staff and the care plans and risk assessments are of a very high standard. Due to his experience in more clinical settings and his recent appointment we have, however, assessed this standard as not quite met. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Health and safety audits were seen and these are completed each month. The Manager stated that visits from representatives of Care Principles Ltd have recently increased as part of quality assurance systems. The Manager was completing the AQAA at the time of the inspection although we had not received this by the following morning and therefore we have been unable to assess this part of the home’s quality assurance. As evidenced, by what staff told us and information provided in their training records, a requirement has been met, as staff have attended training in how to operate a fire extinguisher. Staff have attended training in fire safety, including fire drills, first aid and some have attended training in food hygiene. According to the Manager arrangements for training in these areas for other staff to attend have been made. Records for checks of hot water temperatures in baths/showers, portable appliance equipment, fire alarms and emergency lighting and accidents and incidents were satisfactory. According to the Manager action has been taken in response to the last fire safety officer’s inspection, that was carried out in August 2008, to include the ordering of door fire guards and arranging fire warden training for two members of the staff. Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 Standard No Score 1 2 2 3 3 x 4 x 5 x INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 2 25 x 26 x 27 x 28 x 29 x 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 x 32 3 33 x 34 2 35 2 36 x CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 4 4 x 4 x LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 4 13 4 14 4 15 3 16 4 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 x 2 x 3 x x 3 x Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 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 YA24 Regulation 23(2)(b) Requirement People must be made safer and their dignity respected by an improved maintenance of the home to include floor covering, window repairs, garden furniture and “seasonal” tidiness of the gardens. People must be protected from the risk of harm from unsuitable staff by ensuring full and satisfactory information is obtained before they are allowed to work at the home. This includes dates of their employment history, written explanations of gaps in their employment history, challenging incorrect information in the application form and making sense of information in any reference received and evidence that this has been reviewed during the recruitment and interviewing process. Timescale for action 05/01/09 2. YA34 19 20/10/08 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 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 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 Commission for Social Care Inspection Eastern Region Commission for Social Care Inspection Eastern Regional Contact Team CPC1, Capital Park Fulbourn Cambridge, CB21 5XE 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 Conifer Lodge DS0000062547.V371411.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 29 - 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!