Inspection on 24/01/07 for Dyneley House

This inspection was carried out on 24th January 2007.

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 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

Dyneley House 21/02/06

Dyneley House 18/10/05

Dyneley House 11/01/05

Dyneley House 22/09/04

Similar services:

Snydale Care Home

Abbey The

Larchfield Manor

Hawkhills

Beeches The - North Yorkshire County Council

The Grove Waltham

Carentan House

Ravensworth Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Dyneley House 10 Allerton Hill Leeds West Yorkshire LS7 3QB Lead Inspector Ann Stoner Key Unannounced Inspection 24th January 2007 10:00 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 Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Dyneley House Address 10 Allerton Hill Leeds West Yorkshire LS7 3QB 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) 0113 268 1812 0113 266 7356 Greendown Trust Limited Mrs Pamela McGown Care Home 21 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (21) of places Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 21st February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Dyneley House is owned by Greendown Trust and is a registered charity. The home provides care, without nursing, to 21 people of both sexes over the age of 65. It was originally set up to provide care and support specifically to members of the Christian Science Church, but now people of all faiths are welcome. The home is set in mature well-tended gardens, and is situated in a suburb of Leeds, close to local shops, and restaurants. There are 21 single bedrooms, all with an en-suite facility, and spacious communal space includes a lounge, dining room and 2 conservatories. There is a no smoking and no alcohol policy in the home. Fees that applied at the time of this inspection were stated in the preinspection questionnaire as ranging from £420 - £430. More up to date information may be obtained from the home. Copies of previous inspection reports are available in the home. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. In April 2006 the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) made some changes to the way in which care services are inspected. Care services are now judged against outcome groups. The inspection report is divided into separate sections for each outcome group for example Choice of Home. An overall judgement is made for each outcome group based on the findings of the inspection. The judgements reflect how well the service delivers outcomes to the people using the service. The judgements categories are “excellent”, “good”, “adequate” and “poor”. The judgements are recorded within the main body of this report. More detailed information about these changes is available on our website – www.csci.org.uk The last inspection was unannounced and took place on the 21st February 2006. There have been no further visits until this unannounced key inspection, which took place between 10.00am and 5.00pm on the 24th January 2007. The purpose of this visit was to monitor standards of care in the home and to look at progress in meeting the requirements and recommendations made at the last visit. Before the inspection a pre-inspection questionnaire was sent out to the home, this provided some information for this report. The people who live in the home prefer the term ‘resident’ and this will be used throughout this report. Before the inspection I sent out survey cards to residents, relatives, health care professionals, GPs and had a telephone conversation with four relatives. I received five completed survey cards from residents, five from relatives, one from a community nurse and one from a GP. Comments from the survey cards and telephone conversations can be found throughout this report. During the inspection I spoke to residents, visitors, the administrator, staff on duty and the manager, I looked at records, made a tour of the building and watched staff working with residents. At the manager’s request feedback from this inspection was given the following day on the 25th January 2007. I would like to extend my thanks to everyone who contributed to the inspection and for the hospitality during the visit. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The manager has addressed all of the requirements and recommendations made at the last inspection. She was also aware of the shortfalls with the home’s care planning systems, and had devised her own format. This system is now easy to follow and gives very clear instructions to staff on how to deliver care based on resident’s individual needs. The kitchen has been refurbished to a very high standard and a new guest/visitor’s toilet has been provided. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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): 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Standard 6 does not apply to this home. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There is sufficient information available to residents and their families to make an informed decision about the home. All residents have their needs assessed before being admitted to the home. EVIDENCE: The care records of three residents were sampled, and in all cases there was an Easy Care assessment, the home’s pre-admission assessment and a signed contract of terms and conditions, specifying the fees payable and any additional charges. During a telephone conversation with two relatives before the inspection visit, both said that they had the opportunity to visit the home, and were given written information, before the resident made any decision about moving in. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 In a returned survey card from a resident one person said, “I came for lunch one day, before I decided to live here.” To make sure that the home can meet the person’s needs, a pre-admission assessment is always carried out. From the selection seen, there was some very good information recorded about what the person could do for him/herself and what support was needed from staff. For example, one person’s preadmission assessment stated, ‘can manage to fasten buttons, but cannot manage to pull clothes over her head’. Another person’s stated, ‘if clothes are put within easy reach she can manage to dress herself, but needs assistance from one member of staff with buttons and stocking.’ This level of recording is good practice. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Care plans are now clear, concise and easy to follow. Some amendments and improvements are needed but the manager is already dealing with this. Resident’s health care needs are well met, and medication practices are safe. The dignity and privacy of residents is respected. EVIDENCE: The manager recognised the shortfalls in the home’s care planning format and decided to address the issue by devising her own. This had lead to a great improvement in the level of detail recorded and in the information provided to staff on how to deliver care based on each person’s needs, strengths and choices. For example, in one person’s plan it stated, ‘can manage to take his own teeth out and put them back in, but requires staff to clean them on a daily basis and soak them in Steradent each night.’ Another person’s plan stated, Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 ‘can manage to dress herself with large items, but requires some support with underwear, tights and shoes.’ Other plans contained similar information. The resident’s key worker reviews all care plans on a monthly basis. These reviews are excellent, and give a really good account of how the care plan is still meeting the person’s needs. Residents and/or their relatives contribute to the review and their signature accompanies that of the key worker. During the inspection a key worker was seen carrying out a review with a resident in the privacy of her bedroom. During telephone conversations with relatives before this inspection it was clear that they had seen the care plans and felt included and involved in reviews. There are still some improvements and additions to be made, such as the completion of the person’s life history and minor changes to the format, but the manager is already aware and dealing with these. The care plans are very well sequenced making an audit trail easy to follow. There were good instructions for staff in one person’s care plan about monitoring changes in the person’s condition. It was clear that staff had followed these instructions and were proactive in identifying a potential problem. Those relatives spoken to on the telephone said that they were confident that the resident’s health care needs were met. In a returned survey card from a GP he described the home as being ‘excellent’. In another returned survey card from a community nurse it was stated, “This home has provided a high level of care to many of our patients. The care staff are always helpful and willing to assist when required.” Those residents who returned survey cards all indicated that they always received the medical support they need. Good practice was seen when staff were administering medication, and one member of staff was extremely patient when encouraging one person to swallow his tablets. Medication Administration Records (MAR) were completed accurately, but handwritten entries made by staff were not checked and countersigned by a second person. Risk assessments are in place for those people that self medicate all or part of their medication; the manager is in the process of amending these to include details of monitoring compliance. A record should be made on the MAR of the amount, date and time when medication is handed over to the service user to self medicate. A recommendation has been made. Residents looked smart and it was clear that staff pay attention to detail. Some residents were wearing jewellery others proudly displayed painted nails. The home’s induction programme includes information about respecting people’s privacy and dignity. Staff knocked on bedroom doors before entering. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are able to enjoy a life that is based around their beliefs and choices and staff understand the importance of friends and family in their lives. A wholesome and nutritious diet is provided. EVIDENCE: It was clear from the care plans sampled that resident’s choices are respected. Two residents had specified that they preferred a bath in the afternoon, whilst another said that she preferred her bath first thing in the morning. Staff confirmed that these choices were met. Those residents not wishing to eat in the dining room are served with their meal in their room, and there is no pressure placed on residents to join in any group activities. Minutes of residents’ meetings show that they are consulted about the type of activities provided and that they are happy with the amount offered. However, during the inspection the only interaction some of the more dependent Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 residents had with staff was only at times when care was being delivered. A recommendation has been made. Christian Science readings take place in the conservatory on a weekly basis and are integral part of life of the people who follow this faith. Residents who are not of this faith said that there is no obligation or pressure put on them to join in the readings, but anyone from any domination may listen and join in. Residents not of that faith are able to follow their own beliefs. The home is aware of the importance of residents maintaining contact with their friends and family. One person has a bedroom large enough to accommodate another bed so that his wife can stay with him for long weekends. During a telephone conversation before this inspection relatives said that they were welcomed into the home and were offered refreshments. During the inspection this appeared to be standard practice with all visitors. One relative said that he has stayed for a meal at the home, and thought that the kitchen staff were very efficient. Another person said that her relative ‘loves the meals’ and said that they ‘smell gorgeous’. All of the residents who returned survey cards said that they ‘always liked the meals’. During the inspection the lunchtime meal was unhurried and staff gave assistance where needed in a discreet way. The menu of the day was placed on each table and residents sat discussing this before the meal was served. There is always a choice at the lunchtime meal, one being a vegetarian option and at tea there are three options from which residents can choose. Quality assurance surveys and minutes of residents’ meetings show that residents are consulted about the menus. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There is a robust complaints procedure and residents are confident that complaints will be taken seriously. Residents are protected by the existence of a vulnerable adults procedure. EVIDENCE: There is a comprehensive and clear complaints procedure, in large print, which is readily available to residents and relatives. The home has received no complaints since the last inspection. Telephone conversations with two relatives confirmed that they would have no hesitation in making a complaint if necessary, and both said that they received information about how to make a complaint when the resident was admitted. All returned survey cards from residents indicated that they felt that staff listened to them and acted upon what they had to say. There are robust procedures in place to protect residents from abuse and whistle blowing procedures to protect staff. Care staff described the different types of abuse, including the more subtle types of abuse such as neglect and institutional abuse, and knew what to do if they suspected someone was at risk of being abused. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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, 24 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home meets the needs of the residents that live there. Staff have a good understanding of the necessary precautions to be taken to prevent cross infection. EVIDENCE: The home is very well maintained. The kitchen has recently been refurbished to a very high standard and a new guest/visitor’s toilet has been provided. Bedrooms are very comfortable and individualised with personal possessions, creating a homely touch. All bedroom doors are fitted with a system that allows the doors to remain open but which automatically close on the sound of the fire alarm. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 There are attractive grounds at the back of the home with plenty of outdoor seating for residents and their visitors. Two relatives, one during a telephone conversation before the inspection and another during the inspection, said that there were never any offensive odours in the home. All of the residents surveyed said that the home was always clean and fresh smelling. Staff described the measures they take to prevent the spread of infection in the home, and good systems for hand washing were seen in all of the areas where bodily waste or clinical waste is handled. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Staffing levels do not always meet the needs of the residents, but the manager agreed to address this immediately. Recruitment is robust and makes sure that people are safe and suitable to work with vulnerable people. Training is seen as important in the home and the amount of training on offer to staff is commendable. EVIDENCE: Rotas supplied before the inspection visit showed that at weekends there are sometimes only two staff on duty on an evening shift. There are 5 residents who require assistance from two members of staff, which means that there are times when other residents are left unattended. From discussions with staff it was clear that they felt rushed at such times. During the feedback session the manager agreed to rectify this so that staffing levels on the evening shift would not fall below three carers. It is not clear from the rotas the exact hours each person works. The recruitment records of two new members of staff were sampled, and in each case all the necessary checks had taken place before the person started work. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The pre-inspection questionnaire shows that staff have had access to a range of different training courses during the last 12 months. This includes, Understanding Parkinson’s Disease, Management of people with mental health problems, Practical dementia training, Creative activity skills in older people, Risk assessment in care homes, food hygiene, first aid, effective communication, health and safety training and many more. New staff complete an intensive induction programme based on the Skills for Care induction standards, and during the course of the programme complete a portfolio. One portfolio seen was very impressive; it included information over and above that required and was put together so that it could form part of the person’s eventual assessment for NVQ (National Vocational Qualification). The pre-inspection questionnaire shows that 75 of staff have achieved an NVQ, and almost all the remaining staff are being assessed. The manager is striving for an eventual completion rate of 100 . The manager has attended a meeting about ‘end of life care’ and as a result will be supporting some staff to complete the ‘Gold Standards Framework’, so that they are confident and competent when working with people in the last stages of life. This is good practice. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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, 37 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is very well managed. The interests of the residents are seen as very important to the manager and staff, and residents finances are safeguarded at all times. EVIDENCE: There is a good staffing structure in the home, with an administrator, team leaders, senior care workers, care and ancillary staff all working together and supporting the manager. Staff said that they have confidence in the manager and they try to follow her example. Team leaders are professional, confident and knowledgeable. They take an active part in training and supervising staff, and provide a good role model to others working in the home. Team leaders Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 have delegated responsibilities, which gives them a good degree of autonomy and job satisfaction, but the manager is always in control. The manager is able to identify any shortfalls in the home, such as the care plans, and has the necessary skills and competence to address and improve them. Information supplied before the inspection visit, such as the analysis of falls within the home, and the analysis of quality assurance questionnaires was of a very high standard. The manager said that staff turnover in the home had been low over the last 12 months. She thought that this was a result of an effective supervision programme. The manager supervises team leaders, and they then in turn supervise other staff. Good clear records of supervision sessions are kept, and it is clear that staff have the opportunity to discuss any issues they are unsure about. Staff and residents meetings are held regularly. The manager supplied minutes from these meetings before the inspection visit. Staff said that they felt that their meetings were effective and that they had the opportunity to voice their opinions. It is evident that staff are consulted and their views are taken into consideration by the manager when making certain decisions. The manager was able to give a very good example of this in practice. Some residents manage their own finances and look after their pocket money. There are lockable facilities in the bedrooms for the safe keeping of valuables. Other residents hand small amounts of money to staff to keep in the safe. There are clear records of all residents’ money and the home is subject to an external annual audit and the administrator produces management accounts to the Trustees every month. Before the inspection the manager supplied a selection of COSHH risk assessments and the pre-inspection questionnaire showed that servicing of equipment takes place as required. A team leader has responsibility for carrying out health and safety checks in the home. Weekly fire tests are carried out and recorded, but the record does not show that a different fire point has been tested each time. A recommendation has been made to address this. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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 3 3 3 3 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 4 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 4 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X 3 X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 4 29 3 30 4 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 4 X 3 X 3 3 3 3 Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 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 Refer to Standard OP9 Good Practice Recommendations To reduce the risk of error, handwritten entries on Medication Administration Records (MAR) should be checked and countersigned by a second person. A record should be made on the MAR of the amount, time and date when medication is handed over to a resident to self medicate. The home should look at the deployment of staff to make sure that time is spent on a daily basis sitting and chatting, or offering some stimulation however limited, to people who are unable to occupy themselves or participate in group activities. Staffing rotas should show the exact hours each person works, e.g. 7.30 – 3.30, rather than ‘E’, so that information and an audit trail is available, as and when needed, at a future date. 2 OP12 3 OP27 Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 4 OP38 To make sure that all fire alarm points are in good working order, a different point must be tested each week. A record of which point has been tested should be made. Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Aire House Town Street Rodley Leeds LS13 1HP National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Dyneley House DS0000001445.V327950.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!