Inspection on 19/10/06 for David Lewis Centre

This inspection was carried out on 19th October 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Good. 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 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

David Lewis Centre 12/07/07

Similar services:

Ruskin Lodge

Clover House

Dystlegh Grange

The Good Companions

Springfield Cottage

Cuerden Grange Rest Home

Parkside

Park Lodge

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 David Lewis Centre - College Community House 94/96 Mill Lane Macclesfield Cheshire SK11 7NR Lead Inspector Judith Morton Key Unannounced Inspection 19th October 2006 14:30 David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.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 David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.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. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service David Lewis Centre - College Community House Address 94/96 Mill Lane Macclesfield Cheshire SK11 7NR 01565 640000 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) David Lewis Centre Deborah Gittins Care Home 8 Category(ies) of Learning disability (8), Physical disability (8) registration, with number of places David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. This home is registered for a maximum of 8 residents to include: * Up to 8 people in the category of LD (learning disability) * Up to 8 people in the category of PD (physical disability) The registered provider must, at all times, employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Staffing must be provided to meet the dependency needs of the service users at all times and will comply with any guidance, which may be issued through the Commission for Social Care Inspection. First Inspection. 2. 3. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: The David Lewis Centre’s community house in Macclesfield is registered for eight residents who have epilepsy. The house is in the centre of Macclesfield, within easy reach of public transport facilities with a train and bus station nearby. The house is made up of three flats comprising bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and living room, and five single bedrooms, which all have ensuite facilities. The house also has a shower room, bathroom, toilet, kitchen, lounge and computer room. The house is close to local shops, takeaway food shops and pubs. Many of the people living in the house go to Macclesfield College which is about 10 minutes drive away. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The people who live in the Macclesfield Community House are called students throughout this report, as this is how they like to be referred to. This unannounced visit, part of the first inspection for this service, took place on 19 October 2006 and lasted five and a half hours. The manager was on leave and so she was told about the findings of the inspection on 31st October. This visit was just one part of the inspection. Other information received by CSCI about the home was also looked at. Before the visit, the manager was asked to complete a questionnaire to provide up to date information about the services provided. CSCI questionnaires were given to students, their families, health and social care professionals to find out their views about the home. Comments from forms that were sent back to CSCI have been included in the report. During the visit, various records were looked at as well as the house itself. A number of students and staff were also spoken with and they gave their views about the service. These are also included in the report. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Any complaints made by the students should be dealt with according to the David Lewis Centre’s complaints policy and recorded in the same manner as complaints made by any other person. Other matters that students raise (that are not complaints) should be recorded. This would make sure that they are aware and happy with the way their problems have been dealt with. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.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 David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1, 2, 4 & 5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. Good information about the service is provided and thorough assessments are done to make sure that students’ needs can be met at the home. EVIDENCE: The service user guide and statement of purpose have enough information so that students know what level of care, support and independence they could expect while living at Macclesfield Community House. Each student’s file contains a personal profile that includes information about their life history, family, hobbies and interests. Although the wishes of students were noted, there was nothing on file to show how the goal could be achieved and what support was needed from staff to do it. Although the student’s religion was recorded on there was nothing to show they’d been asked if they wanted to follow that religion and what help they would need to do that. As the house is newly re-built, the students were not able to stay there before they moved in but they did visit whilst the building work was going on. One of the students wrote on their questionnaire that they knew very little about the house before moving there; another wrote that they heard about the house, heard that they were moving to the house and then were told that they were moving there. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 The registered manager explained that because the house was being re-built, they were never sure how long that would take. Information about the house was still being produced so they could not always answer the students’ questions. They had brought the students to see the building work as soon as it was safe to do so. Any new residents moving in now would receive information and would be able to visit to meet all of the other students living there. Each of the students had a placement agreement on their file. On the file checked, the placement agreement from their last placement had been signed by both the staff member and the student but had not been signed by either for the community house. Students should be involved in every process about their moving to the Macclesfield House including signing their placement agreement. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. The involvement of the students in their plan of care means that they have an opportunity to contribute to all aspects of their life in and outside the home. EVIDENCE: There was a person centred care plan on the file checked. The student had brought this with them when they moved from their previous accommodation at the David Lewis Centre. The plan described what the student was good at and what areas they would like to develop. The plan in the file checked had been written in 2005 but there was nothing to show if the student’s ambitions had changed since moving to the house in the community. The person centred plans should be reviewed regularly and any additions dated, to make sure that as the students’ needs and wishes change the staff can still help them towards their goal. Students had been involved in their annual review and an annual report was available on file. They had also been involved in the tutorial review meeting and had signed the document to show their attendance. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 A behaviour management plan was also present and this had been reviewed. The student’s daytime timetable was on their file, together with a health action plan, which included management of their epilepsy. Contact with the student’s family and professionals such as the social worker was recorded. The daily records were being written by the staff and did not include the views of the students. Steps should be taken to ensure that students’ own views of how their day has been are recorded. Students had made some decisions about their life in that they had signed consent to certain activities such as swimming, horse riding, hairdressing etc. One student had signed, ‘yes’ to administering their own medication but the staff member had signed ‘no’. This was not consistent with the entry made in the person centred plan, which stated that “I keep my own tablets locked in my room and staff check on them regularly to make sure I am taking them. The same had also occurred for the student wishing to travel independently. The files need to show that steps have been taken to enable the student to reach independence in each area, particularly where there is conflict between the wishes of the student and the view of staff. Each of the students’ goals should be clearly identified and held with the plan as to how they are to achieve them. Risk assessments in relation to use of the kitchen, ironing, bathing and other daily living activities were available. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. Students needs are being met with a variety of community based activities that enable them to have opportunities for personal development. EVIDENCE: The students spoken with confirmed that they attended Macclesfield College at varying times throughout the week. The students also go to the pub, which is almost opposite the house, and they can play pool. The evening of this visit was the last one before the students went home for half term. One student went out to the local Chinese restaurant, three students went for a meal with two members of staff and another stayed home and had a takeaway meal with the senior member of staff. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Other activities include bowling, visiting the gym and going to the cinema. One of the students spoken with said that they were disappointed with the lack of support to do individual activities rather than in a group. “I thought I was going to make new friends, go out on my own and have more freedom. I know it is easier to go to the chippy or to the pub but when I was in the David Lewis I could go out every night and meet my friends either in the grounds or at the youth club. They were going to try us on public transport but they’ve changed their minds so we have to go in the mini bus or stay in.” The same student said they had told their base tutor at college that they liked trains and had looked on the internet for ballroom dance classes. “There was one in Stockport and I could go there if they would let a member of staff go with me until I am able to go on my own. I can make new friends then”. A plan should be available to show how the individual aspirations of the students can be met. The student’s level of contact with family is included in their care file. Students can maintain contact via telephone, email, letter etc as well as going home outside of term time. Students spoken with confirmed this also. One student was unhappy at the restrictions from seeing his girlfriend who still lives at the David Lewis Centre. She has her own programme which means they cannot meet during the week although they see each other at the weekend. The manager said that this had been explained to the student and they provided the transport for him to see his girlfriend at the weekends. Students are helped to recognise the responsibilities of daily living, as they have to maintain the cleanliness of the house, their room, do their laundry and take it in turns to cook a meal one day a week for the other members of the house. The students are involved in deciding the meal that they will cook each week and are encouraged and advised about healthy eating. Because there are a number of takeaways on the same road as the house, easily accessed and an easier option than cooking, the staff have had to give plenty of guidance about how often the students visit them and making healthy food choices. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. The level of support given to the students, including meeting their health needs and taking necessary medication, ensures their safety, while maintaining a degree of independence. EVIDENCE: The level of personal support needed by each student is described in their care plan. Some of the students are largely independent in this area and may only require verbal prompts with occasional physical intervention, depending on the activity. The students are registered with the local GP surgery. Other health needs are maintained by community services and both staff and the social worker at the David Lewis Centre meet the students’ emotional needs. Staff administer the medication for those students who are cannot keep their own medicine safely or don’t remember to take it on time. Each of the students has a lockable cupboard or drawer in their flat/bedroom so that they can safely store their own medication if self-administering. The manager said that some students are involved in filling their dosette boxes, with staff support, and of keeping their own medication locked in their room. The level of self-administration would depend on their risk assessment to do so. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. Processes for protecting adults from abuse and for dealing with complaints are in place but improvements are needed in recording and following through complaints and comments made by the students, so they can have confidence that theyr complaints are taken seriously. EVIDENCE: Two students spoken with said they don’t feel staff take their complaints seriously and another wrote this on the questionnaire returned to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. One complaint had been recorded as received since the house opened; this was not from one of the students. However, two students who were spoken with said that they had complained about different aspects of their care at Macclesfield House. One said they had brought the issue up during a students’ meeting and evidence of this was available in the minutes. These had not been recorded as complaints; therefore there was no evidence available to show how it had been dealt with, or if it had been dealt with at all. This would give the students the impression that their complaint had not been taken seriously. The complaints procedure should be followed for the students in the same way that it would for any other person. All complaints should be recorded. Any comments which are not complaints but are brought up by individual students, should also be recorded together with any action taken and the outcome. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 There were up to date policies available for staff on adult protection. Staff have received training in the Protection of Vulnerable Adults from Abuse. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. The quality of the décor, furnishings and facilities available for the students ensures that they are living in a modern, comfortable and well-maintained environment. EVIDENCE: The David Lewis Centre Community House in Macclesfield is newly built. There are 3 purpose built flats and 5 bedrooms with en-suites. All of the bedrooms, including the flats, are single rooms, with sufficient storage and doors with locks that can be opened easily in an emergency. The students can hold their own key to their door if they wish and this was observed to be in practice during the site visit. There are television, telephone, satellite and internet connections in each of the rooms. Each of the three flats has a lounge/kitchen/diner. The kitchens have plenty of storage and workspace and have lino flooring for easy cleaning. The living area of the room is carpeted and has comfortable modern furniture. There is also a television/video cabinet and a small dining table with 2 chairs. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 There is a communal lounge of 18.5m2 that is furnished to the same standard as the flats. There are a number of bathrooms for general use; however, all of the bed-sits have en-suite facilities and the flats also have private bathrooms. There is a separate laundry room for use by all eight residents. Although the machines are not of domestic style, they are all electronically programmable. The students have responsibility for keeping their own flat or bedroom clean and tidy. They all share the responsibility for the other areas of the house, with staff support at a level required. There is a ramp to the front door as well as steps. Bedrooms are available on the ground floor for any students who have a physical disability that would make it difficult or impossible to negotiate stairs. The environment and facilities, including lighting, ventilation, doors and windows, are checked monthly to identify any problems. The housing organisation from which the house is rented attends to any of the jobs identified at the audit. On the day of the site visit the home was clean, fresh and tidy. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34, 35 & 36 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. The training and support through supervision, given to staff together with the recruitment checks being made ensures students are protected from harm and poor practice. EVIDENCE: The students showed through their comments that they know who the manager is. Many of them regularly send her e-mails to discuss various aspects of their life in the community house. The senior carer spoken with was also aware of her role and responsibilities within the house. Four staff files were checked. The David Lewis Centre human resources staff has audited all the files earlier in the year and obtained as much missing information as possible. As some of the staff had worked for the David Lewis Centre for years, some references were missing and could no longer be sought. However, all of the newer staff files were complete and all four files contained evidence that a check had been made by the Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) and the Protection of Vulnerable Adult list (POVA) if applicable. There was also evidence that new staff had received induction training. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 There was a directory of training courses available for staff and all staff were to receive a minimum of 10 days training per year. The staff training included equality and diversity, protection of vulnerable adults, adult care, pharmacy introduction, interpersonal relationships, food hygiene, health and safety, first aid, management of challenging behaviour, breakaway techniques and physical intervention. Formal staff supervision was taking place at the community house and a chart of this supervision was kept so the manager could see at a glance when a staff member’s supervision was due. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the service. The manager is knowledgeable and experienced and staff can contribute to the running of the home through staff meetings but improvements are needed in the way students are enabled to contribute so that they have more influence on how their home is run. EVIDENCE: The registered manager for the home has achieved NVQ Level 4 and the Registered Manager’s Award. She has worked for the David Lewis Centre for many years, gaining internal promotion and transferring to the Macclesfield House. She has maintained and increased her knowledge through attending additional training courses provided by the David Lewis Centre. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 The manager and staff spoke of there being weekly house meetings with the students. Minutes of some of the meetings were available but they had not taken place weekly and there were large gaps in between. The manager said that occasionally the students would want to use the meetings to moan about, or criticise a particular member of the house. No agendas were made in advance of the meetings, which could prevent instances like this happening. The student’s meetings can give them a regular opportunity to influence the way the house is run and suggest any changes or new introductions that they would like to see. The minutes of the meetings showed that a staff member chaired the meetings and the manager should consider asking those students who wish, to take it in turns to chair the meetings, with support if needed. There was also a suggestion box which the senior staff member said wasn’t really used anymore and would probably only contain suggestions for activities. However, if this is not used regularly and the suggestions responded to by staff, students may not use it if they think it is not effective. A quality assurance system, developed specifically for the Macclesfield House, that includes the views of the students, their families, professionals, including college staff, GP, social workers and so on should be developed for the future. All gas and electrical equipment and the fire safety equipment are checked to make sure that they are working properly. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 3 2 X 3 X 4 3 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 2 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 4 25 4 26 4 27 4 28 4 29 3 30 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc 3 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 Score PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Version 5.2 Page 24 David Lewis Centre - College Community House 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 Standard YA22 Regulation 22 (8) Timescale for action A record must be kept of all 01/01/07 complaints made by service users including details of any investigation, action taken and outcome. Requirement 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 YA2 Good Practice Recommendations The care plan for each student should identify their personal goals and aspirations and what support is needed to help them achieve these. This should also be done, backed up by a risk assessment, where there are conflicting views between the student and staff. • The plans should also identify if the student wishes to follow their religion • A placement agreement specific to the student’s placement at the community house should be drawn up and signed Each student’s person centred plan should be reviewed regularly and updated as required. Evidence of students’ participation in chosen individual activities should be kept. DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 • 2 3 YA6 YA12 David Lewis Centre - College Community House 4 5 YA22 YA39 8 YA39 A complaints and comments book should be devised so that complaints/comments can be tracked through to completion. Steps should be taken to involve students more in the way the home is run by, for example: • students’ meetings taking place regularly with students becoming more involved in chairing and noting the meetings, with support as needed • keeping the suggestion box and adding any general suggestions to the weekly meeting agenda An annual quality assurance system that seeks the views of the students, staff, college staff and health care professionals, should be devised and a report of the findings produced. David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Northwich Local Office Unit D Off Rudheath Way Gadbrook Park Northwich CW9 7LT 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 David Lewis Centre - College Community House DS0000066418.V309632.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - 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!