Inspection on 21/05/08 for Dove House

This inspection was carried out on 21st May 2008.

CSCI found this care home to be providing an Good service.

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Dove House 07/07/06

Dove House 14/12/05

Dove House 25/05/05

Dove House 29/11/04

Dove House 29/06/04

Dove House 12/09/03

Dove House 21/11/02

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 27/09/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Dove House Dovehouse Green Ashbourne Derbyshire DE6 1FF Lead Inspector Tony Barker Unannounced Inspection 21st May 2008 09:25 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.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 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. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Dove House Address Dovehouse Green Ashbourne Derbyshire DE6 1FF 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) (01335) 346079 hill212@btinternet.com Mrs Kathleen Janet Hill Mrs Kathleen Janet Hill Care Home 16 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (16) of places Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 7th July 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Dove House is a 16-bedded care home providing personal care for older people, located close to the market place in Ashbourne. Dove House has a number of different levels, with service user accommodation located on the upper floors. Access to these floors is either via the stairs or shaft lift. Dove House has 10 single and 3-shared rooms. Ensuite facilities are provided in all but one bedroom. Service users have access to a dining room and two separate lounge areas on the ground floor. Service users also have access to a large well-tended garden. A number of bedrooms have direct access to the garden. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 2 star. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes. The time spent on this inspection was 8.25 hours and was a key unannounced inspection. Survey forms were posted to service users, their relatives, staff and external professionals before this inspection and 25 people responded. The Provider/Manager, the Administrator, a care assistant and two residents were spoken to in some detail. Records were inspected and there was a tour of the premises. Two residents were case tracked so as to determine the quality of service from their perspective. This inspection focussed on all the key standards and on the progress made towards achieving the requirements and recommendations made at the last inspection. The pre-inspection, Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA), questionnaire was reviewed prior to this inspection. The Service’s fees were detailed in an insert within the brochure and ranged from £292 to £410 per week. Copies of the last inspection report from the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) were kept in the entrance hall and the office. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 No requirements were made at this inspection. 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. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3&6 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Individual written needs assessments were in place before people were admitted to the Home so that their diverse needs were identified and planned for. EVIDENCE: The files of two residents, recently admitted, were examined. There was evidence of a written assessment of their needs having been undertaken prior to their admission. Staff were therefore able to identify individuals’ needs, and meet them, based on this assessment. All nine residents who completed the postal surveys agreed that they receive the care and support they needed. One added that, “The staff are very attentive to my needs”. The Home was not providing intermediate care. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9 & 10 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents each had a plan of care which, together with their expressed comments, demonstrated that their health, personal and social care need were being well met. Residents were being treated with respect and their right to privacy was upheld. EVIDENCE: Two residents were case tracked so as to identify the standard of care provided by the service from their own perspective and from individual records and discussions with the Manager and staff. These two residents were local authority funded and they each had a written plan of care, drawn up by Social Services, that recorded their needs and made broad reference to how these needs were to be met. However, these care plans did not detail the action to be taken by staff in order to meet all aspects of the residents’ health, personal and social care needs: the Service had not developed its own care plans to do this. For instance, one of the residents case tracked needed “encouraging to do most things” according to the Manager but this important aspect of the person’s care was not recorded on file. However, detailed care plans were in Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 place for self-funding residents and residents’ 24-hour preferred routines were recorded on all individual files showing that a person centred approach was being taken. One resident spoken to said routines within the Home, such as rising and breakfast times were flexible – adding, “You can do anything here within reason”. Files showed that annual reviews of residents’ care, undertaken by the Service in conjunction with Social Services, were being held and in-house monthly reviews of the care provided were recorded. One resident personally confirmed that their key worker met with them monthly to undertake this review. These reviews provided an opportunity to monitor the care provided in order to reflect residents’ changing needs. This system of monitoring individuals’ on-going needs was again apparent from the recorded risk assessments, and periodic reviews, seen on the files examined. These covered areas such as residents’ risk from falling, moving and handling and tissue viability and provided a means of measuring and minimising these risks. However, from discussion with the Manager it was clear that the most recent tissue viability risk assessment of one case tracked resident was not an accurate reflection of the person’s current condition and the Manager accepted that her monitoring of files could be more methodical. The observed lack of staff signatures and dates on some recorded risk assessments was another issue raised with the Manager and would impact on her file monitoring and ability to ensure that she maintained an accurate and up to date overview of care provided by the service. Residents’ health needs were being met through appropriate contact with external health professionals. Evidence of this was from comprehensive recording examined in the Home and from comments made by the health professionals and residents who completed survey questionnaires. One resident stated, “If I ever need a doctor or nurse they are called promptly”. Medication was being securely and appropriately stored. One resident described how their insulin was kept in a cool-box in their bedroom and the main supply within a dedicated refrigerator. Case tracked residents’ Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheets were examined. These were generally satisfactory although there were three gaps against ear and eye drops, indicating staff may have forgotten to sign to confirm administration of these medicines. Risk assessments were in place to demonstrate the capacity of those residents who wished to self-administer their own medicines. All those staff who administer medicines had had in-house training in the safe use of medicines, the Manager said, and training from the Service’s pharmacist. However, staff had not been provided with training from a body accredited to provide such training. Residents were observed being treated with respect by staff. Both residents spoken to said staff respect their dignity and privacy and they were observed to be well turned out. They both confirmed that they were satisfied with the Service’s laundry system. One resident said they had a shared room and felt there was enough privacy. Residents had access to a telephone either by Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 using the pay phone available or by having their own private telephone line installed within their rooms. All residents who responded to the postal survey confirmed that staff listen and act on what they say – one adding that they do this “with a smile”. The care assistant spoken to gave examples of how she meets residents’ need for privacy and dignity at bath times. In the AQAA the Manager stated that, “The privacy and dignity of our residents is probably the most important aspect of our work”. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14 & 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Service provided activities that were diverse and benefited residents. Family contact was encouraged and residents were provided with meals that were varied and which they enjoyed. EVIDENCE: Relatives, in their completed survey questionnaires, were very positive about the number and range of activities available to residents. Comments made included, “They have always got different activities going on…plenty to do” and “There is plenty to interest the residents”. Residents were also positive and their comments included, “Plenty of activities” and “There is a wide and varied programme…visits and trips are arranged along with craft activities, musical entertainment and a monthly visit from different religious denominations for holy communion”. Details of planned trips out and future visits from entertainers were displayed in the entrance hall. The Manager was the Service’s Activity Co-ordinator. She described a very good range of activities both within and outside the Home including five hours a week from an entertainer, frequent opportunities for craft and music and frequent trips out to local places of interest. The variety of activities on offer to residents is commendable. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Both residents spoken to said that they receive visitors who can stay for as long as they wish. Although one of these residents’ relatives lived a long distance away the other had three daughters who all visited every week. The visitors book confirmed that there were frequent visitors to the Home and evidence of this was observed during this inspection. Two visiting friends spoken to said they are “always made welcome with tea and biscuits”. One relative who responded to the postal survey made a point of saying that, “Visitors are made very welcome”. The Manager stated that no residents were in need of professional advocates but that leaflets on advocacy services were normally kept on the table in the front hall. There was evidence at this inspection of residents exercising personal autonomy and choice. Considerable evidence was seen in residents’ bedrooms of independent lifestyles. Both residents spoken to, and others within the dining room, were all positive about the quality of food provided and the opportunity for alternative meals. There was recorded evidence also of the choices offered to residents and of the details of meals actually eaten. A board displayed the tea-time menu for the day so residents did not have to ask for this information. The lunch-time meals were not recorded like this. One resident spoken to said they particularly enjoyed “lunch at the pub with other residents”. Residents who responded to the postal survey confirmed the good quality of meals provided – with one commenting, “There is always plenty of choice of good home cooked food”. The cook pointed out that fresh vegetables were provided each day as well as frozen. A tour of the kitchen indicated good food stock levels, including fresh fruit and vegetables as well as home made items. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 & 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Procedures for handling complaints and abuse were in place ensuring residents were protected. Residents felt they were listened to and felt safe. EVIDENCE: The Service had a complaints procedure, that was displayed in the entrance hall, setting out how complaints would be dealt with. A copy was also seen on the inside of individual bedroom doors. The Manager stated in the AQAA that 13 complaints had been received by the Service within the previous 12 months. These were examined from the Minor Complaints book and all were found to be relatively minor concerns raised by residents. They provided further evidence of the Service listening to residents and taking appropriate action. There had been no formal complaints made. Residents who responded to the postal survey knew who to speak to if they were not happy and how to make a complaint. One resident spoken to said, “I feel able to talk to Kath (the Manager) about anything...I’m very happy here”. Relatives who responded to the postal survey were all positive about communications to and from the Service and one relative’s comments summed up those made by many others – “I have never had any cause for concern about the care mum receives”. The quality of the Service’s response to concerns and complaints is commendable. Both residents spoken to stated that they felt safe living at Dove House. One said, “Staff watch out for me…keep me safe”. All staff had been provided with Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 external ‘safeguarding adults’ training by Derbyshire County Council in March 2004, the Manager said. She added that there were about six staff now needing this training in order to ensure they were fully aware of how to respond to evidence of abuse. The care assistant spoken to confirmed she had been provided with this training and showed an awareness of the importance of ‘whistle blowing’ should there be suspicion of abusive behaviour towards a resident. However, she did not recall reading the Service’s whistle blowing policy and a list of staff signatures, confirming those who had read this policy, did not include this staff member’s name. An information sheet on safeguarding adults was displayed in the hallway. A copy of Derbyshire’s Safeguarding Adults’ procedures was being kept within the Home although the Manager could find no official ‘Alert Forms’ which are to be sent to Social Services in the event of suspicion of abuse. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19 & 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents were living in an attractive and comfortable environment that was clean and hygienic. EVIDENCE: A tour of the Home was undertaken and communal areas were found to be nicely furnished and decorated with good facilities. There were several wall pictures in corridors further adding to the homely effect. Also, a montage of photographs of residents was displayed in the hallway. Resident’s bedrooms were comfortable furnished and personalised and included their own personal items of furniture and furnishings. The layout of shared bedrooms allowed appropriate degrees of privacy. All bedrooms had an en-suite WC and shower except one – this room was positioned near to a bathroom. The emergency call system main panel did not visually reflect the status of one bedroom although the alarm does sound when the point in that room is activated, the Manager said, so the system is not unsafe. She spoke of plans to address this Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 by replacing the emergency call system, although this had not been included in the AQAA. Not all corridors had been fitted with handrails for the safety of residents with poor mobility. The premises were clean and hygienic. Residents who responded to the postal survey confirmed that the Home was always fresh and clean. One added that, “There are none of the smells sometimes associated with other homes”. The Manager stated that half of the staff group was in need of Infection Control training and this was planned for June 2008. She said two domestic staff, two cooks and the handyman would be included on this training. The Service had a satisfactory Infection Control policy. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 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 Service had a good level of well trained staff to ensure that residents were safe and their needs were met. EVIDENCE: The AQAA indicated that the Service was providing satisfactory care staff hours as well as ancillary hours. The care assistant spoken to had no hesitation in confirming that there were adequate numbers of staff employed by the Service and residents spoken to confirmed this. All residents who responded to the postal survey confirmed that staff were always available when needed, except occasionally due to staff sickness or holidays. One resident added that, “The staff are available 24/7”. The Manager confirmed that 12 of the 19 care staff had achieved a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in Care at level 2. This exceeded the 50 level required by the National Minimum Standards. Six of these staff had achieved an NVQ in Care at level 3 and a further one had a qualification at NVQ level 4 in Care. The files of two recently appointed members of staff were examined. Safe recruitment practices were found to have been followed except that... • there was no proof of identity, including a recent photograph, on staff file and, Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 the Service’s job application form did not explicitly ask the applicant for details of any criminal offences in respect of which they had been cautioned. Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks were in place, for all staff. Staffing records confirmed that all staff had been provided with mandatory training to ensure adequate skills and competence for the job. There was no ’at a glance’ training matrix available for a quick confirmation of this. The care assistant spoken to also confirmed that she had attended a suitable number of training courses over the previous 12 months. There was evidence of good quality induction and foundation training of new staff although these were not meeting the current specifications laid down by ‘Skills for Care’: out of date Training Organisation for the Personal Social Services (TOPPS) documents were still in use. • Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35,36 & 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Service was being well managed so that residents were protected and their best interests were promoted by the systems in place. EVIDENCE: The Manager had eleven years of experience in owning and managing Dove House. She had achieved a National Vocational Qualification in Care at level 4 and the Registered Managers Award. She had not kept herself fully up to date with some aspects of managing care homes. These included Regulation 19/Schedule 2 governing the safe employment of staff, the current staff induction and foundation training specifications laid down by ‘Skills for Care’, and Regulation 15 and Standard 7 that set out the need for the registered person to prepare a written care plan for each resident. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 The high level of satisfaction of residents, relatives and external professionals, as reflected in the completed postal surveys, and from direct evidence gained at this inspection, indicated that residents’ views and wishes were being sought and taken account of by the Service. Periodic residents meetings were being held and there was past evidence of the Service monitoring its quality through satisfaction questionnaires. The Manager said that residents, relatives and external professionals had been surveyed two years previously regarding their opinion on the quality of the Service provided. However, there was no recorded evidence of a systematic cycle of planning, action and review reflecting aims and outcomes for residents – by means of an Annual Development Plan for the Service. Also, there were few references in the AQAA to past and future improvements to the Service: the Manager stating, in conclusion, that, “We provide the best service we can for our residents”. Resident’s finances were not kept for them by the Service. Residents and/or their representatives were retaining full control of their finances. Staff had received around two to three formal, personal supervision sessions within the previous nine months in order to ensure their competence and development were being monitored and discussed, according to records examined. This is less than the frequency of six a year, recommended in the National Minimum Standards. One care assistant spoken to said she felt supported by the Manager who was, “approachable and listens”. Most staff who responded to the postal survey confirmed they were given adequate support. The AQAA showed that equipment was being checked and maintained appropriately. Fire drills were being carried out monthly and fire alarm tests weekly. Good food hygiene practices were being followed. There were a good set of environmental risk assessments in place indicating the priority being given to residents’ safety. The record of maintenance undertaken was examined and this indicated that defects were being addressed quickly. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.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 Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 4 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 4 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 2 X N/A 3 X 3 Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 No Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 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. 5. 6. 7. 8. Refer to Standard OP7 OP8 OP8 OP9 OP9 OP15 OP18 OP18 Good Practice Recommendations The service should develop written action plans that describe the care to be provided to those residents who are not self funding. Risk assessments should be kept up to date. The Manager should monitor residents’ records more methodically. Medication sheets should provide an accurate record of medicines administered. Staff should be provided with training in the safe use of medicines from a body accredited to provide such training. Details of daily lunch-time meals should be displayed for residents to read. Staff who have not been provided with safeguarding adults training should receive this and all staff should be expected to read the Service’s ‘whistle blowing’ policy. The Manager should obtain a pack of Derbyshire’s official safeguarding ‘Alert Forms’. DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Dove House 9. 10. OP19 OP29 11. 12. 13. 14. OP30 OP31 OP33 OP36 A risk assessment should be developed to determine the need for additional handrails to be fitted in some corridors for the safety of residents with poor mobility. Proof of identity of new staff, including a photograph, should be obtained before appointment and the wording of the Service’s job application form should be reviewed so as to provide further safeguards when appointing staff. The induction and foundation training of new staff should meet the current specifications laid down by ‘Skills for Care’. The Manager should keep herself fully up to date with aspects of managing a care home through our professional web site www.csci.org.uk/professional The Service should undertake more self-monitoring through satisfaction questionnaires and the provision of an Annual Development Plan. Staff should receive formal supervision six times a year to ensure that the Service’s policies and procedures are put into practice. Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Eastern Region Commission for Social Care Inspection Eastern Regional Contact Team CPC1, Capital Park Fulbourn Cambridge, CB21 5XE National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Dove House DS0000019976.V365282.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!