Inspection on 23/05/06 for Court House Residential Home

This inspection was carried out on 23rd 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.

Other inspections for this house

Court House Residential Home 20/01/10

Court House Residential Home 06/08/07

Court House Residential Home 06/01/06

Court House Residential Home 20/07/05

Court House Residential Home 11/03/05

Court House Residential Home 10/11/04

Court House Residential Home 24/02/04

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Court House Residential Home Court House Station Road Cullompton Devon EX15 1BE Lead Inspector Louise Delacroix Unannounced Inspection 10:50 23 and 24th May 2006 rd 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 Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.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. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Court House Residential Home Address Court House Station Road Cullompton Devon EX15 1BE 01884 32510 01884 32510 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) Mrs Manjula Odedra Care Home 23 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (23), Physical disability over 65 years of age of places (23) Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 6th January 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Court House is a large detached and extended property with attractive gardens. The home has twenty bedrooms, fifteen of which are en-suite and provides personal care for twenty-three older people. There is a lift to the first floor, although the layout of this floor may make it unsuitable for people using a wheelchair or for those who have difficulty with steps. Court House is a short walking distance from the town of Cullompton and has parking space for visitors. The home’s inspection reports are clearly displayed by the visitors’ book. The monthly cost of the homes ranges from £380 – £510. There are additional charges for the hairdresser, newspapers, clothing, toiletries and ‘other items of luxury or personal nature’. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.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 two days and during this time seventeen residents were living at the home. Four members of staff, the management team, four relatives and nine residents contributed to the inspection. This report also includes feedback from comment cards received from general practitioners and Health and Social Care professionals. Surveys could not be sent to residents or relatives prior to the inspection, as the home did not provide this information within the requested timescale. As part of the inspection, four people were case tracked, this means that four residents were asked about their experience of living at the home, their rooms were visited and the records linked to their care and stay inspected. During the inspection, a tour of the building took place and records including fire, care plans, residents’ contracts and medication were looked at. This home has already received a random inspection early in May 2006 as a result of an enforcement notice, which focussed on the quality of staff recruitment procedures. As a result of this inspection, a requirement was repeated to improve the standard of recruitment. What the service does well: There have been some marked improvements since the last inspection and the owner and staff are to be commended. The home assesses prospective residents to be sure that they can meet their needs. Contracts are in place and trial visits are encouraged. Staff know the clients well and this knowledge is supported by good quality care plans. The home liaises appropriately with health care professionals. Generally medication is well managed, and staff treat residents with respect and maintain their dignity. A visitor to the home said they ‘couldn’t fault it’ and residents said staff were ‘very good’, ‘good humoured’ and ‘thoughtful’. Visitors are made to feel welcome. Residents are generally positive about the food and the atmosphere it is served in is unrushed. The home takes complaints seriously and responds appropriately. The home is attractive, well maintained and clean with no odours. Residents spoke positively about their rooms. The home has carried out a quality assurance survey and provided feedback on the results. Residents’ personal allowances are well managed and generally safety checks are up to date. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.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 Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.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): 1,2,3,5,6 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Insufficient information is provided to new residents to the home. This practice does not enable residents to make an informed choice, although trial visits are encouraged. Assessments are adequate meaning that staff have sufficient information to meet residents’ needs. EVIDENCE: The statement of purpose requires updating as the manager details are no longer correct and room sizes are not included. Four residents said that they did not remember seeing either the statement of purpose or a service user guide when they moved to the home. However, they thought this information might have been given to their relatives, which was confirmed by the home’s management team. Discussion also took place about providing an accessible service user guide for residents as some residents showed through discussion that they were not aware of all the services the home offered. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9 All four residents who were case tracked (see explanation in the report’s summary) had completed contracts. These contracts detail some specific extra costs such as hairdressing but not the additional cost of infrared pendant personal alarms. Instead, there is a generic statement that there is an additional cost for ‘other items of luxury or personal nature’. Three admission assessments were looked at for residents who had recently moved to the home. A senior explained that these took place either during a visit to the home or in the prospective resident’s own home and that the prospective resident and their family contribute, although this was not clear from the recording. These assessments contained appropriate information, including social interests and mobility. For people funded through Social Services a copy of a shared assessment by health and social professionals was in place. The residents interviewed had difficulty remembering when these assessments took place but said that their families had taken a strong lead in making arrangements with the home. Residents spoken to about their involvement in choosing the home all said that either due to ill health or personal preference they had chosen not to stay for lunch or the afternoon as part of a trial visit, although this is offered in the statement of purpose and staff confirmed trial visits were available. Visitors met during the inspection were not asked about trial visits as their relatives/friends had lived at the home a number of years. Staff explained that the home does not take emergency admissions. The home does not provide an intermediate care service. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 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): 7,8,9,10 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The staff have a good understanding of the health needs and personal care needs of residents, which is documented clearly in care plans. Generally the medication within the home is safely managed. The ethos of the home promotes respect and the maintenance of dignity for residents. EVIDENCE: Four care plans were inspected and a significant improvement was noted from previous inspections. Identified risks had been assessed with a clear record of the action taken and the subsequent outcome. Regular reviews of residents’ care take place and care plans show residents’ changing needs. The care plans recognised the social, emotional and physical care needs of residents, which reflected discussions with staff and residents, and were signed by residents’ advocates. There was evidence of good practice by detailed recording of the support given to a new resident to help them settle in. Daily care notes show regular contact with local surgeries and the district nurse team and care plans contain guidance for staff to manage the health Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 needs of residents. There is a focus on preventative measures and skin care, and a tour of the building and discussion with staff and residents showed that the home ensures appropriate equipment e.g. pressure-relieving mattresses are used to minimise health problems. There is clear recording where health advice has been given to residents and the options tried to minimise health concerns. Gentle exercise classes have become more regular, which several residents said they enjoyed. Five GPs responded with positive comments about the home, which included the home communicating clearly, staff demonstrating a clear understanding of the care needs of residents and appropriately managing the medication. A representative from the district nurse team also commented favourably about the home and stated that help/advice was requested appropriately. The administration of medication was observed, which highlighted good practice. Medication records and supplies are generally well maintained, including the completion of the controlled drugs book. However, a prescription for a former resident was still on the premises. Records show that staff are observed by a senior to ensure that their medication practice is safe. At the time of the inspection, nobody living at the home were administering their own medication but lockable storage is available should this occur. Staff showed knowledge of the homely remedies policy for the home and knew what action to take. Care plans are written in a respectful manner and show a recognition of residents’ individuality, which is echoed by the approach of staff towards residents, although a resident also praised staff for being able to have ‘a laugh and a joke’. Residents commented on the ‘thoughtful’ and ‘caring’ manner of staff, and the general consensus was that staff respected their dignity. One person who chooses to be cared for in bed looked well cared for and the person said they were comfortable. Residents gave other examples of how staff maintain their dignity and respect e.g. the way they are supported to have a bath, care of their clothes and belongings, and being called by their preferred name. This respect was also shown during an observed medication round and in the way that staff spoke about the residents. Induction records for new staff show that respect and dignity issues are covered and reviewed through observation by experienced staff. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 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): 12,13,14,15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Social activities have improved recently but still do not meet the needs of all residents. Residents are encouraged to maintain contact with friends and families as they wish and visitors feel welcomed. Residents are encouraged to maintain their independence through establishing their own routines and being offered choice. Meals are well managed and offered in a relaxed and homely atmosphere. EVIDENCE: In the last month there has been improvements to the range of activities offered by the home, which was acknowledged by one of the residents, and these are now well recorded. The records also show recognition of the differing needs and abilities of residents. The activities include pet therapy and a gentle exercise group (both of which occurred during the inspection). Residents spoke favourably about participating in these and a recent gardening group. A Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 cabaret artist visits monthly, and a monthly holy communion takes place at the home. Recently, there has been a focus on word games, including spelling. However, five residents said they would like more activities and two commented that activities did not occur on a regular basis. Records show that some residents who have a sensory impairment are not catered for, although one person with these needs stated that they managed to find enough to do in their own room and did not feel lonely. Management confirmed that the recruitment of an activities co-coordinator has been unsuccessful but this is an option they are still pursuing. Visitors spoken to during the inspection felt welcomed by staff and able to visit when they chose to. One person felt that the home communicated well with them. Residents were seen receiving visitors in private in their rooms during the inspection, and the visitors’ book evidenced many residents receiving regular contact with friends and family. There are three communal areas to also meet with visitors. In discussion with residents, the general consensus appeared to be that they were not restricted by the home’s routine and that they could establish their own routine, although time could pass slowly when activities were not available. Many people have brought their own possessions to the home, including furniture and some manage their own money with the support of families or advocates. A menu is displayed in one of the lounges and the home is considering how to ensure residents with a sensory impairment are kept informed of the dishes available. A lunchtime meal was observed. There was a relaxed and unhurried atmosphere with residents chatting among themselves and ‘seconds’ being offered. Most people felt the food met their needs and had no complaints about it. Residents said they did not recall being asked their likes and dislikes but a list was clearly displayed in the kitchen recording this detail, and discussion with the cook showed an awareness of changing tastes, particularly when residents became unwell. Some residents commented that they were not aware that alternatives could be prepared if they did not like the planned meal, but then added that this had never caused a problem for them, as they liked what was served. Another resident explained that they were always offered an alternative for one of the planned dishes because they did not like it. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 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 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There is a commitment to address complaints but lack of knowledge about the protection of vulnerable adults procedure has the potential to put the residents at risk. EVIDENCE: The owner and staff have shown a commitment to respond to complaints and address poor practice. In the last year, a number of complaints have been recorded by the home. These have been connected to the quality of the food. Records show a commitment to address the concerns and with a new cook in post there have been no further complaints in this area. A visitor said they were confident in the staff addressing problems and found that communication was good. They felt that the home’s owner and their family were approachable. A relative who contacted the Commission for Social Care Inspection echoed this. The complaints procedure is clearly displayed. On previous occasions, care staff at the home have alerted management to poor practice by newly recruited staff and appropriate action has been taken. However, discussion with a member of staff showed that although they were committed to ‘stamp out’ poor practice, they were unclear about the alerter’s role. This role is explained in a public document that has been agreed by a group of agencies, such as the Police and Social Services. The staff member was unclear of their responsibility to involve other agencies to investigate Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 allegations of abuse, which could jeopardise later prosecution of the perpetrator. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 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): 19,22,23,26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The standard of the environment is high, providing residents with attractive, safe and clean surroundings with a homely feel. Portable call bells have improved the safety of frailer residents, although the purchase of a hoist would further maximise the independence of residents. EVIDENCE: The home is well maintained with an attractive garden, which is popular with residents. A programme of redecoration has taken place as rooms become vacant, which has included new carpets but records are not generally kept of improvements. Residents’ needs can generally be met in their environment. There are grab rails and raised toilet seats as appropriate. There is a fixed Arjo chair in the downstairs bathroom and two portable electric seats. Due to the different floor Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 levels, parts of the first floor would not be suitable for residents who use a wheelchair or have difficulty in managing stairs. One resident’s needs have increased and they have been moved to a room, which enables them to more easily access the home’s communal areas. Their relative was very positive about this move and how this had been managed by the home. The home does not currently have a hoist which could be problematic when residents’ health needs increase, especially as the home aims to care for people until their death. The owner has installed a portable call bell system to meet the needs of frailer or sensory impaired residents. A resident was positive about this as it made them feel safer. All the residents spoken to were positive about their rooms, many of which were personalised with pictures, furniture and plants. There was a sense from talking with residents of ownership of their rooms and that their privacy was respected. This inspection was unannounced, and as on previous visits the home was very clean and odour free. Residents felt that their belongings were well cared for. Residents and visitors confirmed this to always be the case and was much appreciated, and this view has been repeated in the home’s quality assurance survey. The provider has invested in a washing machine with a sluicing facility. Hand washing facilities are available in the laundry area. Liquid soap, gloves and paper towels were seen in residents’ rooms to help prevent cross infection. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 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): 27,28,29,30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Staff have a caring approach with recognition of individual needs, although staffing levels can operate at a minimum. The procedures for recruiting staff and how this is recorded have improved, which helps promote the safety of residents. Staff training could be better organised to ensure that all staff can meet the residents’ needs. EVIDENCE: On the first day of inspection, there were four members of care staff on duty in the morning and lunchtime, plus management. There was also the cook and one of a team of two domestics. The rota showed that from 6pm there were three care staff on duty in the afternoon, which reduced to two in the evening with one waking night staff from 10pm with sleep in cover. The senior confirmed that the sleep in cover was woken if necessary and care records evidence this to be the case. On the second day of inspection, there were three members of care on duty in the morning and two in the afternoon, plus a cook, a domestic and management. Guidance for staffing levels recommends that there should be four care staff in the morning, three in the afternoon and three in the evening. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 However, residents spoken to during the inspection did not raise staffing levels as a problem or as affecting their care. They described staff as ‘thoughtful’, ’resourceful’ and ‘kind’. Staff members caring and respectful approach was also observed throughout the inspection. Staff also stated that staffing levels were not problematic, although at the time of the inspection the home was running with several vacancies. Management said that they were aiming to build a team of ‘bank’ staff to call on when residents’ health deteriorated and extra care was needed. The home does not have the recommended minimum of 50 of the care staff with an NVQ 2 or above, although staff spoke positively about being encouraged to take up NVQ training. The home has been served with an enforcement notice to improve their recruitment process as a result of repeated requirements in this area. A follow up visit to this enforcement notice took place on 2nd May where some improvements were noted. During this inspection, staff files were inspected again and found to contain all the required information, including reasons for gaps in employment histories and a clearer audit trail. Staff and management explained that an audit of staff training had been started, this was discussed at the last inspection, but this information is no longer available with changes in staffing. For example, when training needs to be updated. Currently, the home cannot provide clear evidence of the care staff’s training and the management said they were in the process of gathering this information. They are aware that there are currently only three members of staff who are trained in first aid and therefore not all shifts are covered by a suitably trained person and are seeking to address this. However, good induction records were seen and staff confirmed this took place Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 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): 31,33,35,38 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents have not benefited from having a registered manager in post to over see the development of the service. However, quality assurance surveys within the home enable residents to make their views known about the running of the home. There are good recording systems in place, meaning that residents’ welfare is protected. EVIDENCE: The home has been operating without a manager registered with the CSCI since April 2005. Part of the registration process includes a Fit Person Interview, and a self-assessment form to enable judgements to be made on Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 the applicant’s knowledge and experience. The owner has confirmed that they are actively looking to recruit a manager. Management of the home currently lies with the owner, their family and senior staff. Quality assurance questionnaires have recently been collated and the responses fed back in a friendly letter to residents and relatives. The management team are considering how to better inform residents of what is going on in the home and how residents can contribute their ideas. A visitor said the home was good at keeping them up to date with changes. The management of three residents personal allowances was spot checked and found to be accurate. There is clear system in place, which can be audited. The home is appropriately insured. The electrical wiring has been checked and is due for re-checking in 2007. Portable electrical appliances have not been checked recently, lists date back to 2004. Records were seen of maintenance checks for gas, the lift and bath hoists. All the staff on duty during the inspection received external fire training within the last six months, apart from one member of staff who been advised of the fire procedure during their induction. The staff member and induction records confirmed this. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 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 2 2 3 x 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 1 3 x x 2 3 x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 2 29 3 30 1 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 1 x 3 x 3 x x 2 Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24 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 OP9 Regulation 13 (2) Timescale for action The registered person shall make 30/06/06 arrangements for the recording, handling, safekeeping, safe administration and disposal of medicines into the care home. (When residents leave the home, medicines must be returned to them, unless the resident has positively consented to their safe disposal e.g. returned to the supplier). The registered person shall 31/07/06 consult service users about the programme of activities arranged by or on behalf of the care home. (Provide a regular programme of activities to meet the needs of all residents, including those people with a sensory impairment). The registered person shall make 31/07/06 suitable arrangements, by training staff or by other measures, to prevent service users being harmed or suffering abuse or being placed at risk of harm or abuse. (The home must obtain a copy of the local Alerter’s Guide and ensure that all senior members of staff DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 Requirement 2. OP12 16 (2) 3. OP18 13 (6) Court House Residential Home 4. OP30 5. OP31 5. OP31 6. OP38 attend a protection of vulnerable adult training course so they are clear about their role). 18 (1) (c ) The registered person shall (i) ensure that the persons employed by the registered person to work at the care home receive training appropriate to the work they are to perform. (There must be a first aider on duty on every shift. A training audit must be carried out and action taken to meet any identified training needs). 8 (1) (ii) The registered provider shall appoint an individual to manage the care home where the registered provider is not a fit person to manage a care home. (The home must appoint a manager). 8 (1) (b) An application to register a (i) manager must be submitted to the CSCI. (This is a repeated requirement). 13 (4) (a) The registered person shall ensure that all parts of the home to which service users have access are so far as reasonably practicable free from avoidable risks. (All portable electrical appliances must be tested to confirm they are safe to use). 30/06/06 31/07/06 01/09/06 30/06/06 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 OP1 Good Practice Recommendations The statement of purpose should be updated to reflect the DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 26 Court House Residential Home 2. OP2 3. OP22 4. 5. OP27 OP28 current management structure and include the room sizes. A service user guide should be provided to all residents and include details of meals. Additional costs should be detailed in contracts in a more specific manner, and include the cost of infra red pendent alarms. The home should advise current residents of these changes. The owner should buy an appropriate hoist to meet the needs of physically frail residents and provide suitable training to staff to ensure safe moving and handling techniques for staff and residents. It is strongly recommended that care staff numbers are reviewed and increased, particularly when residents are ill. A minimum of 50 of the care staff must be have an NVQ 2 in care. Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Exeter Suites 1 & 7 Renslade House Bonhay Road Exeter EX4 3AY 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 Court House Residential Home DS0000055579.V292304.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 28 - 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!