Please wait

Please note that the information on this website is now out of date. It is planned that we will update and relaunch, but for now is of historical interest only and we suggest you visit cqc.org.uk

Inspection on 28/05/05 for Crouched Friars Residential Home

Also see our care home review for Crouched Friars Residential Home for more information

This inspection was carried out on 28th May 2005.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.

What the care home does well

Crouched Friars has provided a good level of service, as documented in past inspection reports. Service users, visitors and health professionals have consistently praised the service and the staff for their approach. In December 2004 the previous manager of 20 years retired from the service and a new manager was appointed. It is to the home`s and her credit that not only do service users and their supporters continue to speak highly of the home, but identify improvements in the management of the service. From a professional perspective, the manager was seen to be proactive in responding to issues and has a good understanding of the National Minimum Standards (NMS) and their relationship to the service.

What has improved since the last inspection?

The efforts made by the manager in addressing the NMSs have resulted in both of the Requirements repeated at the last inspection being addressed. These included the lack of risk assessment in the use of bedrails and the content of the protection from abuse policy. The requirement relating to recruitment documentation had not been fully addressed, however, improvements were noted in the level of information gathered, and following inspection visit evidence was provided which addressed some of the omissions.

What the care home could do better:

There are many opportunities for communication between the manager, staff and service users in the home, for example service users meetings, seniors meetings, night staff meetings and day staff meetings. However, the minutes do not contain reference to outcomes from previous meetings and from discussions with service users, the most repeated criticism of the home was its failure to feedback on issues raised with them. There was a failure to ensure that action identified following the review of service users` needs is updated in care plans. The documentation required by regulation and held on staff files had improved. However, some omissions let down the work done in this area. Risk assessments had not always been used to identify action required to protect service users from injury. The manager had worked on these but further improvement was required.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Crouched Friars Residential Home 103-107 Crouch Street Colchester Essex CO3 3HA Lead Inspector Sara Naylor-Wild Announced 28 April to 27 May 2005 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 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. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Crouched Friars Residential Home Address 103-107 Crouch Street Colchester Essex CO3 3HA 01206 572647 01206 763622 Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Weldglobe Limited Mrs Lutchmee Engutsamy Care Home (CRH) 56 Category(ies) of Old Age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (OP), 56 of places Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1 Persons of either sex, aged 65 years and over, who require care by reason of old age only (not to exceed 56 persons). Date of last inspection 11/11/2004 Brief Description of the Service: Crouched Friars is a period property offering care to 56 older people on three floors. The upper floors are accessed via a passenger lift. Most of the bedrooms are single occupancy and all have en-suite facilities. There are several communal areas offering a choice for service users, and a large pleasant garden at the rear of the property with a summerhouse for service users’ use. The property is situated close to Colchester town centre and has access to local amenities, including libraries, shops, post office and public transport. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an announced inspection that took place on the 28th April and 6th May 2005. Additional documentation was reviewed up until 27th May 2005 and included in this inspection. At this inspection the lead inspector was joined by Jenny Elliott, Regulation Inspector. The combined inspection time lasted 19 hours and during this time inspectors spoke with the manager, the responsible individual, four staff, 6 service users, two relatives and four health professionals. The inspection had been scheduled to take account of complaints regarding the management of the home and the risk assessment and management of falls suffered by a service user. The complaint relating to falls was referred to Essex Social Services under the Vulnerable Adults Protection Guidelines. The situation was considered by a multi disciplinary team of Social Services staff, the Police and CSCI inspectors. This concluded that whilst the home had responded to any medical need arising from falls, and documented the decline in the service user’s abilities, there had not been a review of care plans or implementation of a full risk assessment to address these needs. However, as there was no certainty that subsequent falls could have been prevented by this action the complaint was partially upheld. In relation to other aspects of the complaints regarding the conduct and management of the home, the inspection found no evidence to support these views and therefore this part of the complaint is not upheld. It is the aim of the CSCI to ensure that services gain insight and improve as a result of feedback given in relation to complaints and the inspector was pleased to note that since the complaint investigations and meetings with the CSCI, the Manager had been proactive in instigating a falls prevention programme in the home. 22 of the 38 standards were covered at this visit. What the service does well: Crouched Friars has provided a good level of service, as documented in past inspection reports. Service users, visitors and health professionals have consistently praised the service and the staff for their approach. In December 2004 the previous manager of 20 years retired from the service and a new manager was appointed. It is to the home’s and her credit that not only do service users and their supporters continue to speak highly of the home, but identify improvements in the management of the service. From a Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 professional perspective, the manager was seen to be proactive in responding to issues and has a good understanding of the National Minimum Standards (NMS) and their relationship to the service. 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. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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 standard(s) 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 The home provides information to prospective service users and offers trial visits. The assessment of service user’s needs enables the home to develop a care plan and establish the suitability of the prospective admission. The home does not provide intermediate care. EVIDENCE: All of the service users’ files examined contained full assessments of need. The content of these documents met the expectation of the NMS and referred to all aspects of need. This provides clear indications as to whether the individual’s needs can be suitably met in the home. Service users spoken with had received information about the home prior to moving in and although they had not taken up the offer, they were aware that they could have visited the home at that time. The home does not provide intermediate care. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 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 standard(s) 7, 8, and 10 The home’s care plans address identified needs. These provided detailed instruction to staff in how these needs should be met, although review is required to ensure that changed needs are addressed. Health care needs were consistently monitored and addressed to a good standard. Risk assessments required further consideration. particularly those in relation to falls. Service users’ rights to be treated with respect and dignity were largely upheld. EVIDENCE: The care plans for five service users were inspected. These provided a reasonable level of information about service users and their needs, including how well individuals could perform tasks independently and where staff should assist them. The plans were reviewed regularly, however there was evidence that these had not always been amended to demonstrate how staff should meet changing needs. For example, the tendency for a service user to get up in the night and leave their room had not been addressed, although entries of Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 the occurrence had been made in daily records. Care plans did not contain evidence that service users had been involved in their care planning. At the inspection risk assessments related to falls were in place, but these tended to be reflective rather than anticipatory and did not identify triggers that may precipitate a fall. In addition, from cross-referencing with the accident records, assessments were only carried out where significant risk of falls was noted. The manager was advised to ensure that all falls were initially considered and given advice about how the assessments could be improved. Health records were updated regularly, for both inhouse and appointments attended outside of the home. The health professionals spoken with during the inspection were impressed with the home’s response to service users’ health care and felt that they were proactive in addressing any concerns. It was noted on one occasion during the inspection that the call buzzer was ringing for several minutes. The manager went to see what was happening and reported that the call had been responded to but the carer had forgotten to turn the buzzer off. Inspectors were concerned that the buzzer was allowed to ring without an apparent response from another person and how this might impact on the dignity and respect afforded to service users. The manager was asked to review the procedures for this, including consulting with staff and service users. Service users spoken with stated that whilst generally staff’s approach was attentive, polite and respectful, they all identified that a minority of staff whose attitude was more brusque. The monitoring of staff’s conduct through observation and supervision was discussed with the manager. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 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 standard(s) 12, 13, 14 and 15 The daily routine of the home is flexible in response to service users’ preferences. Activities are offered on a regular basis, although further development is required to promote a individual approach to occupation. Visitors are made to feel welcome at the home, and the visiting arrangements are clearly understood. Meals provision was of a good standard and responded to service users’ expectations and preferences. EVIDENCE: Service users spoken with stated they were able to spend their day as they wish, and in a variety of settings offered by the home. One service user said that their preference to spend time in their room rather than socialise was respected by staff, but that staff also made efforts to spend time with them throughout the day. There was evidence through planning documentation and discussions with service users of a variety of activities on offer within the home. These were Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 designed to generally meet service users’ expectations and interests. The manager was given guidance in developing a more individualised approach to activities. Most service users said they enjoyed the opportunities on offer and the choice to participate. On the day of inspection a lively quiz took place in the main lounge. A relative told the inspector that their mother was more independent in the care home than they had been in their own home. This person also said they were welcomed into the home and offered tea or coffee. Meal provision was discussed with service users and relatives. One relative said they were ‘very impressed with the regularity and quality of food provided’. The home has changed the dining facilities since the previous inspection, improving the serving and ambience at meal times. One Service user said that in using the smaller rooms it made the meal feel less rushed and hectic, whilst another said they preferred the physical arrangements but missed their friends. Staff were divided between the two rooms during meal times and observation of their practice in serving and assisting service users with the meal was generally good, although one carer was observed standing by a service user to help them eat their lunch without engaging verbally. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 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 standard(s) 16 and 18 The home operates policies and procedures which support service users’ rights and protects them from abuse. EVIDENCE: Service users spoken with were clear about their right to complain and who to complain to. An issue related to the CSCI regarding the alleged treatment of a service user who complained was considered during the inspection. The service user was able to relate the circumstances involved and this was discussed with the manager. From these discussions, the inspectors were confident that the service user’s issues had been appropriately dealt with and that their rights had been supported in doing so. The staff spoken with were aware of the signs of possible abuse and the policy and procedure adopted by the home in dealing with such incidents. The home’s policy and procedure was in place and met the standards. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 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 standard(s) 19, 20 and 26 The premises provide a safe, well maintained homely environment for service users. There is within reason, ease of access throughout the building, although some areas identified in the report require ongoing risk assessments to be undertaken. The premises were clean and free from odours. EVIDENCE: A programme of refurbishment is ongoing in the home, with each room having individual décor. Parts of the home are very old, with sloping, varying levels of floor and steps linking one part to the next. This provides a challenge to ensure accessibility and safety are maintained. The home used ramps and lifts appropriately to improve access in some of the most difficult areas and has consulted both an Occupational Therapist and the Local Authority Health and Safety Officer. The Manager was encouraged to continue to evaluate means of improving access to all areas of the home. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 The use of stair gates should be reviewed and risk assessments used to determine their appropriateness. New furnishings were being purchased including easy chairs for the lounge areas. Not all of the existing chairs in the home were fire resistant, this was of particular concern in the smoking room. The manager was advised to gain advice from the Environmental Health Officer and risk assess this equipment. A team of housekeeping staff work across the home to maintain a clean environment free from odours. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 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 considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 28, 29 and 30 Staff skills are developed through the induction process, although this should be quality audited against the TOPPS standards. Not all recruitment records were present. A training programme has been initiated and will further support staffs development. EVIDENCE: In discussions with a staff member they described an induction process that included working with a senior member of staff and completion of basic training courses. Records relating to the induction of another member of staff demonstrated that a comprehensive range of subjects had been covered over four days, but the programme had not been mapped against national requirements to ensure all required areas were covered. Recruitment records relating to two members of staff were inspected. There were a small number of gaps in either the information required or the recording of information. The application forms in use by the home did not provide sufficient space for applicants to detail a full employment history and records were not kept of discussions held about gaps in employment. The CRB check for one person was dated 2 days after they commenced employment. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 The home had developed a good training policy. The manager advised that associated paperwork was being developed prior to its implementation. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 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 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31, 32, 36, 37 and 38 All stakeholders in the home had a good relationship with the newly registered manager. There was not consistent formal supervision of staff although informal supervision was evidenced in discussions. Meetings require following up with feedback to participants of any outcomes reached. Records required to protect service users were in place and stored safely. EVIDENCE: One issue raised in the complaints received by the CSCI related to the management arrangements in the home and the confidence that staff and service users held. This was addressed during this inspection and a number of Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 comments received from service users, staff and relatives did not support this complaint. One relative described the manager as very ‘hands on’ with ‘a good idea of what is going on in the home’. One member of staff described the new manager as more relaxed and approachable, adding that there was a consultative approach to discussion at staff meetings. Staff meetings were scheduled for the whole year, sometimes the owner also attended meetings but staff were very clear about where responsibilities lay between the manager and owner. The manager and senior staff meet regularly to discuss concerns and developments. Service users were impressed with the new manager’s interaction with them and spent more time “on floor” than her predecessor. They thought this was beneficial to the home and liked the fact that they saw her throughout the day and, as one service user said, “she is always popping in to say hello, and asking if everything is alright”. All service users found her approachable and felt that because she had worked in the home for so many years it had eased the transition. One service user said they had not been any significant change to how the home felt under the new manager. The service users reported that they were consulted in meetings and on an individual basis. However, most commented on the lack of feedback following discussions and, as one service user said, “there are plenty of chances to talk and they are always asking for our opinion but we don’t get told what they are doing and nothing seems to change”. The inspectors noted that none of the records relating to meetings with both service users and staff contained feedback on the previous agenda outcomes. This was discussed with the manager and advice given. Both staff and service users enjoyed the greater involvement the Responsible Individual, Mrs Odedra, had in the home and noted that she was happy to assist and support staff around the home. The inspectors spoke with four visiting professionals at the home. All described the transition of moving from one manager to another as being handled well and felt that the on-hands approach of the current manager was positive. One described how the proactive approach of the new manager had improved the quality of health care provision to a service user. Staff reported that they felt supported by the manager and seniors but did not have regular, formal one to one supervision. Some of the staff files sampled did contain supervision notes; the regularity of meetings was inconsistent and notes reflected task centred discussions. Supervisors had not necessarily had training in this area. One senior member of staff reported using observation of Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 care practice as part of carers’ supervision. This is considered good practice and the outcome of this should be clearly recorded in supervision notes. Records and certificates relating to equipment and services were in place. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 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 ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 x 3 3 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 x 10 2 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 3 2 x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 3 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x 3 3 3 x x x 1 3 3 Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 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 OP7 Regulation 15 Requirement The registered person must ensure that service users care plans are updated following review and that staffs daily records accurately reflect the successful implementation of the plan. The registered person must also ensure that service users or their representatives particpate in the drawing up of care plans and sign off the completed document. The registered person must ensure that information held on staff files complies with Regulation 19, Schedule 2 of the Care Homes Regulations 2001. This is a repeat requirement. The registered person must ensure that staff undertake reqular, documented, formal supervision, in order to give feedback from monitoring of individuals performance. Timescale for action 31st July 2005 2. OP29 19, Schedule 2 31st July 2005 3. OP36 18 (2) 31st July 2005 4. Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 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. 2. 3. 4. Refer to Standard OP10 OP12 OP20 OP28 Good Practice Recommendations The registered person should monitor staff practice and provide feedback to individuals on their performance. Tthe registered person should develop the provision of activities in response to current good practice guidance. the registered person should carry out risk assessments in relation to th use of stair gates. The registered person should ensure that a minimum ratio of 50 trained members of care staff achieve NVQ level 2 by 2005. This standard was not assessed at this visit and is therefore carried over to the next inspection. The registered person should develop the staff training programme to ensure it reflects the assessed needs of service users and skill shortfalls identified through staff supervision. The registered person should ensure that the findings of quality assurance systems are analysed and published. This standard was not assessed at this visit and is therefore carried over to the next inspection. The registered person should provide for the purposes of inspection sufficient information to enable a determination of financial viability. This standard was not assessed at this visit and is therefore carried over to the next inspection. 5. OP30 6. OP33 7. OP34 Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection 1st Floor, Fairfax House Causton Road Colchester Essex CO1 1RJ 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 Crouched Friars Residential Home I56-I05 S17799 Crouched Friars V219220 280405 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 25 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!