Inspection on 15/11/06 for Croft House

This inspection was carried out on 15th November 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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 7 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Croft House 02/05/07

Croft House 07/02/06

Croft House 27/10/05

Croft House 30/11/04

Croft House 11/06/04

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Croft House 155 Town Street Horsforth Leeds West Yorkshire LS18 5BL Lead Inspector Carol Haj-Najafi Key Unannounced Inspection 15th November 2006 10:15 Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.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 Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.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. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Croft House Address 155 Town Street Horsforth Leeds West Yorkshire LS18 5BL 0113 258 0131 0113 2580131 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) jenkinlodge@st-annes.org.uk St Anne`s Community Services Mrs Diane Joan Barker Care Home 7 Category(ies) of Learning disability (7) registration, with number of places Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 7th February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: St. Anne’s Shelter and Housing Action own Croft House, which is a listed building. It provides accommodation and care, without nursing, for up to 7 service users with a learning disability. It is situated in a pleasant residential area in Horsforth, very close to shops, pubs, a library, a health clinic, GPs, a pharmacy and churches. The home is accessed easily by public transport and has parking for two cars, one of which is a designated disabled space. The home is spacious providing accommodation over two floors, with one bedroom on the ground floor and six on the first floor. There are gardens to the front and rear of the building, with outdoor seating. Each service user is provided with information about the home when they move in and they are given a copy of the service user guide and details of how much their placement costs. The current scale of charges per week are between £843 and £924. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. In April 2006 the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) made some changes to the way in which care services are inspected. Care services are now judged against outcome groups. The inspection report is divided into separate sections for each outcome group for example Choice of Home. An overall judgement is made for each outcome group based on the findings of the inspection. The judgements reflect how well the service delivers outcomes to the people using the service. The judgements categories are “excellent”, “good”, “adequate” and “poor”. The judgements are recorded within the main body of this report. More detailed information about these changes is available on our website – www.csci.org.uk. The last key inspection was carried out in February 2006. A pre-inspection questionnaire was completed by the home and this information was used as part of the inspection process. Comment cards were sent to relatives and healthcare professionals and these responses have been included in the inspection report. One inspector carried out a site visit which started at 10.15am and finished at 4.45pm. Feedback was given to the deputy manager a few days after the inspection. During the visit the inspector looked around the home, observed staff and service user relationships, spoke to service users, staff and the registered manager. The majority of service users living at the home have profound learning disabilities and discussions with service users were very limited, therefore observation of staff contact and communication was an important part of the inspection. Service user plans, risk assessments, healthcare records, meeting minutes, and staff recruitment and training records were looked at. What the service does well: The care planning process is good because the care delivered is based on the service user’s needs. The people who are important to each service user get together and review how things have been going and what will be best for the future. Staff and manager then work hard to make sure they support the service user to achieve the goals. Staff and the management team have worked at the home for a long time and they know the service users well. They know their likes and dislikes and their favourite routines. Service users have regular opportunities to do different things which includes going to the pub, shopping and going to the theatre. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.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 Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.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): 2&5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Previous inspections and procedures indicate that a thorough admission process would be carried out before service users could move into the home. EVIDENCE: No service users have been admitted to the home for over two years, therefore there was very little recent evidence available for many aspects of this outcome group. The admission process was looked at during a previous inspection and all the relevant National Minimum Standards were met. Service users’ files contained placement agreements and these had details of the service terms and conditions and the cost of fees. One service user was over the age of 65. Staff and the manager all said the home was suitable and able to appropriately meet their needs. Currently the home is registered to provide care to people between the ages of 18-65. The manager agreed to apply for a variation of registration. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7, 9 & 10 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The care planning process is very good but to make sure the philosophy of individualised care is followed through, individual care plan records must improve. Information must be recorded individually to make sure service users’ confidentiality is maintained. EVIDENCE: Care records for three service users were looked at. There was good information in each plan of care and there was guidance on how individual needs should be met. For example ‘Can pour own cereal and help make toast, likes having hot drink and breakfast before washing and dressing.’ Staff talked about how they supported service users and again this was reflected in the care plans. Only one of the three care plans was dated. Staff meetings are held every fortnight and care plan reviews are a regular agenda item. The reviews were detailed and the staff team had assessed if Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 goals had been achieved and if changes to the care plan were required. Details of the reviews were recorded in the staff meeting minutes. However, the information was not recorded in care plans, therefore the information in the plans were not up to date. Review meeting dates in the three files were May, June and July 06 Each service user has an annual review. As part of the reviewing process staff prepare new care plans and gather information from families and day services. Care plans and a future action plan are agreed at the review meeting, which is attended by the service user, family and friends, staff from the home and day service staff. One review report identified that one service user should have opportunities to try some baking and have short holiday breaks. Daily records and minutes from the staff meeting confirmed these goals had been achieved. This demonstrates that goal setting is properly monitored. Individual risk assessments had been completed for each service user and the assessments covered areas ranging from going out into the community to aggression towards others. Daily records stated that a ‘physiotherapist had suggested staff are with one service user when coming downstairs’. This recommendation was not being followed and had not been assessed. Staff said service users were encouraged to make decisions but because they have high levels of dependency and staff have to make some decisions on their behalf. Staff gave examples of decisions that were made by service users and this included going to bed, where to go and what to do in the house. Care plans also contained details of what decisions service users could make. For example, ‘decides own bedtime, which is usually between 10.00pm and 11.00pm.’ It was evident that one service user liked having time to herself on a morning. A new morning routine had been introduced to make sure the service user had half an hour to on her own before staff went into assist. Staff and the manager were aware of the routine and agreed it was working well. This is good practice and demonstrates the home is providing individualised care. Each service user had individual records but because care plan reviews were not recorded individually the home did not fully comply with confidentiality procedures. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users have a good lifestyle and have opportunities to participate in different recreational activities. Relatives are happy with the standard of care provided. EVIDENCE: Each service user has a set day when staff support them to do their washing, clean their room and change their bedding. Staff said the level of support varied and some service users would be present but they were unable to do the majority of the tasks but other service users could take more of an active part. Service user plans identified what service users could do and daily records confirmed that staff followed this guidance. For example, a service user plan stated, ‘encourage to place laundry in washing machine’, and the daily records confirmed that the service user was doing this. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Staff said service users get a lot of opportunities to go out and have 1-1 time with staff. Daily records confirmed this and within the last four weeks service users had been for pub meals, to the theatre, on a steam train, shopping, out walking and out for fish and chips. The manager took a service user to a presentation and to do the house shopping on the day of the inspection. A volunteer works at the home and regularly takes service users out on a weekday and at weekends. Each service user attends external day care services and individual day care packages vary depending on service user’s needs. For example one service user attends three different day care services. Some service users also attend evening activities. The last inspection identified that insufficient staff on a weekend limited service user choice. The manager said this was now resolved because the home has full staffing capacity and two service users go to stay with their family on a weekend. The activity room had a lot of different equipment including musical instruments, sensory equipment, games and a piano. The quiet room had a computer which was regularly used by service users. The home had only recently purchased the computer, which staff described as ‘a big hit’. Four comment cards were received from relatives and all responses were positive, they were satisfied with the overall care provided, kept informed of important matters and welcomed in the home. Meals are planned on a daily basis. Staff on shift look at what food is available and what meals have been served over recent days to make sure the menu is not repetitive. The manager checks the food records to make sure meals are nutritionally balanced and varied. Staff and the manager said the meal system worked well. Two weeks food records were looked at and these were varied and nutritious. Staff said they occasionally do theme nights to ensure service users have an opportunity to experience food from different countries. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Although there was evidence that service users were attending healthcare appointments, there was not a satisfactory system in place to monitor healthcare needs and this could result in some healthcare needs not being met. Medication administration has improved and a safe medication system is now in place but some additional work is required to make sure service users get medication when required and using the preferred method. EVIDENCE: Staff said service users use community healthcare services and this includes dentist, chiropodist and GP. Daily records stated that service users had attended healthcare appointments within the last four weeks. Each service user had a healthcare summary sheet but this was not up to date. For example a physiotherapist had visited one service user at the beginning of November but there was no record of this on the summary sheet or on any separate healthcare record. Another service user had a seizure in October but again there was no reference to this on the seizure monitoring chart or in any Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 healthcare record. Staff could not find any record of when one service user had last visited the dentist. A GP comment card stated that they were satisfied with the overall care provided within the home and staff demonstrate a clear understanding of the care needs of service users. Service users’ weight had been monitored and a record was maintained but the information was written in a communal record. An A4 size notice on a bathroom wall gave instructions to staff to put cotton wool and vaseline in one service user’s ear. This information should not be displayed because it does not maintain dignity or confidentiality. The deputy manager agreed to remove the notice when this was discussed at the feedback session. Previous inspections have identified that medication systems were not satisfactory. The manager has introduced new measures to make sure medication is administered properly. Staff said the recent medication training had given them more knowledge and confidence with medication administration. The home has been liaising with the local pharmacist and they have agreed to transfer the medication to a monitored dosage system. No service users self medicate and care plans do not contain any information about medication administration. There should be information that consents to care workers administering medication and personal preference for administration. Daily records stated one service user said they had a headache but medication was not offered because the staff member was unsure if the service user could have headache tablets. This is unacceptable and service users should be given pain relief when required. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Relatives are aware of how to complain if they are unhappy with the standard of service, which helps safeguard service users. EVIDENCE: The pre inspection questionnaire confirmed that the home has a complaint’s and an adult protection procedure. The manager was fully aware of the adult protection procedure and how to report any allegations of abuse. Adult protection training is planned for staff and the manager in the next four months. The manager said the home had not received any complaints within the last twelve months. The home has a complaint’s book to record any complaints and a copy of the procedure was available in the home. Relative comment cards stated they were aware of the home’s complaint procedure and they had not had to make a complaint. Financial records were looked at. All financial transactions were recorded and receipts were obtained for any purchases made. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 26, 27, 28, 29 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is good This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is pleasant, well maintained and service users are very comfortable in their surroundings. EVIDENCE: A tour of the building was carried out. All bedrooms, communal areas and bathrooms were visited. The home was clean and tidy and there were no odours. Decoration, furniture and furnishings were of a good standard. The garden was well maintained and a very pleasant area that service users can safely use. Service users walked freely around the home and used all communal areas. Bedrooms were personalised and each room had items that reflected individual preferences. Photographs of family and friends had also been mounted on the wall. This is good practice and demonstrates that everyone is encouraged to make their rooms homely. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The manager said maintenance workers visit on a regular basis and prior to each visit staff carry out a tour of the building and identify any necessary work. No maintenance problems were seen during the tour. The stair carpet was worn in places but the manager had already identified that this needed replacing and a new carpet was being ordered. There was a supply of disposable gloves and wipes throughout the home. In the laundry there was a sink for washing hands but no anti bacterial hand wash or paper towels. The registered manager must make sure hand washing facilities are appropriate to prevent the spread of infection. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 & 36 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has a good staff team, communication is good and the team meetings are an excellent resource which keep everyone informed. EVIDENCE: The home has a low turnover of staff and most staff have worked at the home for a number of years. Staff at the home had a good knowledge of the service users and were able to provide information about individual likes and dislikes. Staff said ‘the staff team work well together, there is a good homely atmosphere everyone understands their role and their responsibilities.’ They also said, they ‘work hard to involve service users and maintain their skills.’ Staff meetings are held every two weeks. Staff and the manager said the meetings were a good form of communication and an ideal opportunity to talk through anything that was relevant to the home and the service users. The staff meeting minutes confirmed that a whole range of topics were discussed and staff had opportunities to put forward suggestions. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staff said they had opportunities to attend various training courses and generally they thought the training was of a good standard. Training records confirmed staff had recently attended infection control, medication, food hygiene, equality and diversity, epilepsy awareness, professional boundaries and abuse awareness. Four staff have completed the NVQ level 2 award and one has almost finished. Two are due to start in February and five are waiting for dates. Eleven support staff work at the home. Less than 50 of care staff have an NVQ level 2 award. Staff receive 1-1 supervision at least six times a year. In addition to formal supervision, staff said the manager provides informal daily supervision. The home does not hold all the relevant recruitment records in the home. A checklist to confirm the records have been obtained was available. The Commission have agreed that St Anne’s can hold records centrally and these are inspected periodically. A volunteer has also been recently recruited. The manager said all relevant recruitment records were obtained. A checklist was not available for the volunteer. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 38, 39, 40 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is good This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is well managed and a consistent management approach has given everyone working at the home a clear understanding of the home’s aims and objectives. Good systems are in place to monitor the quality of the service. EVIDENCE: The manager has worked at the home for over three years. Staff said they thought the home was well managed. The manager discussed various management systems that she has used to monitor the quality of care provided and this included spending time with staff and service users and checking various records. She talked about individual service users and demonstrated that she had a good understanding of their care needs. The Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 manager and deputy have completed the NVQ level 4 in management and care. It is difficult to obtain the views of the service users living at the home because they have profound learning disabilities and very limited communication. Service users’ families had completed St Anne’s quality monitoring surveys and they were all very satisfied with the home and very happy with the care provided. Once a month the provider visits the home and looks at the general conduct, these visits are called Regulation 26 visits. Copies of reports from these visits are sent to the CSCI. St Anne’s format has recently changed and the visits are now unannounced and the reports are more informative. The report for October was very detailed and it demonstrates that the provider is monitoring the quality of the home. This is good practice. The pre inspection questionnaire stated that policies and procedures were available and regular maintenance and health and safety checks by external agencies were completed at the home. Fire records were checked and these confirmed that regular fire tests are carried out. Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Standard No Score 1 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 3 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 3 25 X 26 3 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 3 32 2 33 3 34 3 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 3 X 2 2 LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 2 2 2 X 3 3 4 3 X 3 X Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No 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. YA6 2. YA9 13 Standard Regulation 15 Requirement Care plans must be dated and reviews must be recorded in care plans to ensure care needs can be properly monitored. Risk assessments must be completed when hazards are identified. This relates specifically to use of the stairs by one service user. Individual records must be maintained for all service users. Personal information that compromises the dignity of service users must not be displayed in the home. Health care needs must be properly monitored. The manager must make sure medication administration meets the needs of service users. This relates specifically to ensuring service users can have pain relief when required and care plans contain information that consents to care workers administering medication and personal preference for administration. The manager must ensure systems are in place to control DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 31/01/07 31/01/07 3. 4. YA10 YA18 17 12 31/01/07 31/01/07 5. 6. YA19 YA20 12 13 31/01/07 28/02/07 7. YA30 13 31/01/07 Croft House Version 5.2 Page 24 8. RQN the spread of infection. This relates to hand washing facilities in the laundry. Care The manager must apply for a Standards variation of registration that Act; enables them to provide care to Section 15 one service user over the age of 65. 31/01/07 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 YA32 Good Practice Recommendations 50 of care staff should hold an NVQ level 2 or equivalent Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Aire House Town Street Rodley Leeds LS13 1HP 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 Croft House DS0000001440.V310929.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!