Inspection on 26/09/07 for Emmanuel House

This inspection was carried out on 26th September 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

Emmanuel House 09/02/09

Similar services:

Townley Road, 2-3

Foxley Lane (121a)

Tudor Lodge

Stacey Street Nursing Home

Delrose House Ltd

Clovelly House Residential Home Ltd

Abbey Road [53]

Cherry Tree House

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Emmanuel House 9 Chalgrove Road London N17 0NP Lead Inspector Caroline Mitchell Key Unannounced Inspection 26 September 2007 2:00 th Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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 Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Emmanuel House Address 9 Chalgrove Road London N17 0NP 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) 020 8801 0992 020 8801 9923 emmanuelhouse_carehome@yahoo.com Mr John Dadzie Helen Ssekubunga Bossa Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Mental disorder, excluding learning disability or registration, with number dementia (3), Mental Disorder, excluding of places learning disability or dementia - over 65 years of age (3) Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Limited to 3 people of either gender who have a mental disorder (MD) and who may also fall into the category of old age (MD(E)). 12th October 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Emmanuel House is owned by Mr John Dadzie, who also owns 2 other care homes in the Tottenham and Walthamstow areas. Emmanuel House is a 3-bedroom terrace house situated in a quiet residential area of Tottenham, North London, near to local shops and public transport. Emmanuel House is registered to provide support and care for 3 residents, who have mental health problems, and who may also be over 65 years of age. The home provides shared accommodation in the lounge, large kitchen/diner and a patio garden. There is 1 bathroom, which includes a toilet. The homes statement of purpose states that residents are encouraged to use all the home’s facilities and are supported to maintain their independence in the home and within the community. Placements at the home cost between £650 to £950 for each person per week. Residents are expected to pay separately for some items and activities, such as eating out. Following Inspecting for Better Lives the provider must make information available about the service, including inspection reports, to residents and other stakeholders. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was undertaken on an unannounced basis. 1 agency staff member was on duty at the time of the inspection along with the manager, who was very helpful throughout the inspection. The inspector reviewed a number of the written records that are kept in the home including the written records for 2 of the residents, the staff records, health and safety, quality assurance, and records of medication. The inspector looked around the house and 1 resident invited the inspector to see their bedroom. At the time of the inspection residents were of a more mature age range, from 64 years and above. The inspector was able to meet all of the 3 residents who live in the home and spoke at some length with 1 of them. The feedback from residents about life in the home was very positive. The inspector wishes to thank the residents and staff for their time and hospitality. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Only 1 recommendation is made arising out o this inspection, regarding steam cleaning the carpet in 1 person’s bedroom. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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 Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2, 5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Admissions are not made to the home until a full needs assessment has been undertaken. Admissions to the home only take place if the service is confident staff have the skills, ability and qualifications to meet the assessed needs of the prospective resident. Peoples’ needs are assessed and they are not admitted to the home unless there is sufficient information to enable a decision as to whether their needs can be met in the home. The charges for the service are made clear to residents. EVIDENCE: The inspector saw the records for 2 people living in the home. There was evidence that sufficient information and independent assessments of need had been provided to the home, prior to them moving in. In addition to the information provided to the home about each person, assessments were undertaken by the home, enabling an informed decision to be made about whether the home could meet their needs. At the previous inspection the registered person was required to ensure that a clear breakdown of the costs of the service, who is responsible for payment, and any additional costs residents are expected to pay is included in individual service user’s guides. At this inspection the inspector found that individualised records have been put in place that include a breakdown of the charges for the Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 service, indicating who is responsible for payment, and to set out the things that residents are expected to pay for themselves, such as podiatry, toiletries and magazines. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. 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 including a visit to this service. The service involves individuals in the planning of care that affects their lifestyle and quality of life. Individuals are encouraged to make their own decisions and choices. The care plans are person centred and are agreed with the individual. The plan is written in plain language, is easy to understand and looks at all areas of the individual’s life. A key worker system allows staff to work on a 1 to 1 basis and contribute to the care plan for the individual. The care plan is a working document reviewed regularly involving the person. It is kept up to dated and focuses on how individuals will develop their skills and considers their future aspirations. Each care plan includes a comprehensive risk assessment, which is reviewed regularly. Management of risk is positive, addressing safety issues whilst aiming for better quality of life. Where limitations are in place, the decisions have been made with the person and are recorded. The home ensures that residents are consulted on a regular basis to gather information about their satisfaction. EVIDENCE: Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 2 people consented to the inspector reviewing their written records. Each had a good quality, comprehensive assessments and plans in place, and these had been reviewed. The inspector also noted that there was good, comprehensive written records kept daily about the wellbeing of each person, what they had eaten and the activities that they had undertaken, as well as monthly summaries of their progress. The inspector noted that each person’s plan had an emphasis on seeking peoples’ views and encouraging their independence in making decisions and in undertaking daily tasks. The inspector observed a number of instances where people were making decisions, and these were acknowledged by staff and taken seriously. It was evident that all of the residents are settled in the home and becoming more confident about expressing their opinions and the manager told the inspector that in a recent review 1 person did most of the talking themselves. The risk assessments seen by the inspector outlined the risks relevant to each person’s lifestyle and needs, and included interventions that minimise these risks. They include signs that might indicate a resident was heading towards a mental health relapse, and interventions to help minimise the risk of this. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. 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 including a visit to this service. The home has a commitment to enabling people who use services to develop their skills, including social, emotional, communication, and independent living skills. Individuals are supported to identify their goals, and work to achieve them. People who live in the home have the opportunity to develop and maintain important personal and family relationships. The practice of staff promotes individual rights and choice, but also considers protection of individuals, supporting people to make informed choices. People are involved in meaningful daytime activities of their own choice and according to their individual interests and capability; they have been involved in the planning of their lifestyle and quality of life. They can access and enjoy the opportunities available in their local community, e.g. using public transport, library services, the local pub, and local leisure facilities. People are encouraged to be involved in the domestic routines of the home, they are supported to take responsibility for their own room, menu planning and cooking meals, making sure that they are able to enjoy the food they prefer and like. The meals taken are monitored and people are encouraged to eat a reasonably balanced diet. EVIDENCE: Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Each person has a planner that broadly sets out the activities that they wish to include in their week. Shopping, walks, trips to museums and out to the pub feature in these plans. These reflect the age of the person, and their interests and preferences. They have recently been reviewed. All 3 of the residents are able to go to the corner shop unaccompanied and need the support of staff to venture further afield. 2 residents came back from a trip to the shops with a staff member. The inspector observed that staff were sensitive and respectful in the way that they approached the residents and treat people as individuals. 1 person indicated to the inspector that that they are not keen on cooking, and said that they have arthritis that stops them from becoming involved, whilst another told the inspector that they liked cooking and showed the inspector a cookery book that they had in their room. Each person has an individualised weekly menu that reflects their own choices and preferences and provides a reasonably varied and balanced diet. In addition a written record is kept of what people had actually eaten to help the team monitor whether people are getting a balanced diet. Regular meetings are held with the residents and they express clear opinions not only about food, but also about the social and leisure activities they wished to include in their schedule. There was lots of evidence that people are encouraged to maintain contact with their friends and families. 1 person has expressed a wish that a friend help manage their boarder financial affairs, and this wish has been recorded and signed up to by the resident. This friend visits regularly, and they sometimes go out together for shopping trips. Another person receives visits from family members, and also keeps very regular telephone contact. They showed the inspector a number of photographs taken of their relatives when visiting. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. 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 including a visit to this service. Personal healthcare needs including specialist health, nursing and dietary requirements are clearly recorded in each resident’s plan; they give a comprehensive overview of their health needs and act as an indicator of change in health requirements. People are supported to be independent and can take responsibility for their personal care needs. People have access to healthcare and remedial services, staff make sure that people are encouraged to be independent, have regular appointments and visit local health care services. The home has a medication policy supported by procedures and practice guidance, which staff understand and follow. Medication records are completed, contain required entries, and are signed by appropriate staff. People are given the support they need to manage their medication. If individuals prefer or where they lack capacity, care staff manage medication. Thought has been given to providing safe but sensitive facilities for keeping medication. Staff have completed an appropriate medication course. EVIDENCE: Peoples’ support needs in relation to their personal care are clearly noted in their plans. The inspector noted that an emphasis is placed on encouraging their independence and maintaining their dignity. 1 person’s records indicated Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 that they take a pride in their appearance and the inspector noted that this person was indeed, well presented. Another person told the inspector that they like to have a shower and not a bath, the manager was familiar with this choice, and it was reflected in the person’s plan. The inspector reviewed the record of incidents and accidents and noted that 1 person had had 2 falls, and this information had been appropriately noted and updated in their plan and risk assessments. The inspector reviewed the written records of 1 person in some detail, and noted that there was a clear record of the medical appointments that they had recently attended. These included visits to the incontinence advisor, chiropodist, dentist, optician and a monitoring record of their appointments with their CPN for a regular depot injection and blood tests with regard to this. The record also included evidence that flu jabs have been made available. Another person told the inspector that they are due to go to the chiropodist in October. The inspector reviewed the arrangements that are in place in the home regarding the storage, administration and recording of medication. The manager told the inspector that the pharmacist collects the prescriptions for the residents and delivers the medication to the home. The record of the medication administered was in good order and the medication was stored appropriately. A record is also kept of the medication coming into the home and of that returned to the pharmacist. There was evidence that the staff had received appropriate training in the administration of medication. There was evidence that staff had been assessed as competent in the task, and a record is kept of the signatures of staff who are able to administer the residents’ medication. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22, 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has an open culture that allows residents to express their views, and concerns in a safe and understanding environment. Residents say that they are happy with the service provision, feel safe and well supported. The service has a complaints procedure that is clearly written, easy to understand and is supplied to everyone living at the home. Residents understand how to make a complaint and are clear about what will happen if a complaint is made. The home understands the procedures for Safeguarding Adults. There are a low number of referrals made as a result of lack of incidents, rather than a lack of understanding about when incidents should be reported. Staff training in safeguarding adult has been provided by the home. EVIDENCE: The residents that spoke to the inspector said that they liked living in the homer, that the staff were nice and that they felt safe there. The inspector noted that the details of how to make a complaint were clearly displayed and nobody wanted to make a complaint, although they were clear about whom to talk to if they had any concerns or complaints. People are provided with lots of opportunities to say what they think and it was evident that they felt comfortable about expressing their opinions. No complaints had been made about the home since the last inspection. No adult protection issues have arisen since the previous inspection. Records reflect that all staff have recently received an update in their training regarding safe guarding adults. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 26, 27, 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. This is a homely atmosphere for people to live in and provides a physical environment that meets the specific needs of the people who live there. People who live there have personalised their rooms. They also say they the home is clean, warm, well lit and there is sufficient hot water. There has been some consultation with residents about the décor, especially for their own rooms. The bathroom is pleasant. The home is generally comfortable, and the decoration, fixtures and fittings are in good order. It is generally clean and tidy and the laundry facilities have been re-sited away from the area where food is prepared. EVIDENCE: The home is an ordinary 3 bedroom terraced house, and fits in with the other local housing. The layout of the home is suitable for the needs of the residents. There is sufficient communal space and the home was warm, homely, clean and well equipped at the time of the inspection. The kitchen diner is light and airy, the lounge comfortable and the bathroom is pleasant and in good decorative order. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 1 resident was kind enough to show the inspector their bedroom. They had lots of their personal possessions in their room, including plenty of books, photographs, a television and a music centre. They said that they were comfortable and had everything the needed in their room, and that the registered person had provided a different bed, as they had chosen a smaller one. Additionally, the resident had kept information about what to do in the event of a fire, and how to complain on their wall. The inspector noted that the carpet in this bedroom would benefit from being steam cleaned, as the resident said that they were not keen on it being replaced, and a recommendation is made in respect of this. At the previous inspection the registered person was required to ensure that laundry facilities are sited so that dirty laundry is not carried through areas where food is stored, prepared, cooked or eaten. The registered person has re-sited the facilities, to the house next door, which is easily accessible for residents and this issue is now resolved. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People who live in the home have confidence in the staff that care for them. Staff members undertake external qualifications beyond the basic requirements. The manager encourages and enable this and recognise the benefits of a skilled, trained workforce. There are consistently enough staff available to meet the needs of the people using the service, with more staff being available at peak times of activity. The way in which agency staff are used is designed to minimise any disruption for residents. The staffing structure is based around delivering outcomes for the residents. The service has a good recruitment procedure. This procedure is followed in practice with the service recognising the importance of effective recruitment procedures in the delivery of good quality services and for the protection of individuals. EVIDENCE: The inspector was shown the planned rota and this indicated that there was generally 1 staff on duty, 2 at key times, and that the manager works in the home on a supernumerary basis. The manager splits her time between Emmanuel House and another small home owned by the registered person, and the planned rota showed the hours to be worked by the manager in the home. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Since the home has reopened 2 years ago, a system of staff support has been developed, including staff communication and development. Staff members have training records and plans in place regarding their individual training needs. Staff records reflect that they have received training in the core areas such as health and safety, fire safety, manual handling, first aid, infection control, and the Mental Capacity Act. The inspector noted that not all staff have evidence of having received food hygiene training, and the manager explained that food hygiene training is booked for December 2007 for the staff who haven’t yet received it. The manager showed the inspector evidence that she is working with the North Central London NHS essential skills team to provide a schedule of training for staff that is relevant to the resident group and most staff have completed or, are undertaking training at NVQ level 3. The manager explained that she had recruited 2 staff through an agency recently. They were working regularly as part of the planned rota and as part of the team, to maintain consistency for the residents. It is likely that they will become employed by the home. The inspector reviewed the written records of 3 staff and found that they reflected that a good standard of recruitment practice. The staff records included all of the necessary pre-employment checks such as CRB checks and written references. Records also reflect that staff receive regular 1-1 supervision, providing feedback about their progress and practice, and encouraging professional development. The manager showed the inspector the records that she keeps of the CRB checks undertaken for the agency staff used in the home. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39, 42 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The manager has the required qualifications and experience and is competent to run the home. She works to improve services and provide an increased quality of life for residents. The manager is person centred in her approach, and leads and supports a stable staff team who have been recruited and trained to a good standard. The manager is aware of current developments both nationally and by CSCI and plans the service accordingly. The manager promotes equal opportunities, has good people skills and understands the importance of person centred care and effective outcomes for people who use the service. Management processes ensure that staff receive feedback on their work. The home works to a health and safety policy, all staff are aware of the policy and are trained to put theory into practice. Regular random checks of the building and equipment take place to ensure the health and safety of the people living and working in the home. The manager ensures risk assessments are completed and taken into account in planning the care and routines of the home. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 EVIDENCE: The manager is registered by the Commission and told the inspector that she has several years experience working in local authority homes. She came across as competent, calm and caring. She places an emphasis on ensuring that staff have access to a good standard of training. She is not working full time in the home, as she also managers another small home for the registered person, Mr Dadzie. At the previous inspection it was recommended that the responsibilities of the senior post be covered in the absence of the post holder. At this inspection it was evident that the management of the home is working well and the manager explained that she has been providing staff members with the opportunity to take on particular areas of responsibility such as, health and safety, medication, fire safety, residents’ finances, activities, shopping and residents’ meetings. She told the inspector that she has assessed 1 staff member as capable of taking on management responsibility, in her absence, as part of the appraisal process and will be discussing the arrangements that can be put into place regarding this with the registered person. There was lots of evidence that feedback is sought from residents through questionnaires, group and 1-1 meetings. The manager showed the inspector the monthly feedback sought from residents as part of the quality assurance system. Questionnaires are also given to staff and to visitors to the home, to help with the quality assurance process. The inspector saw evidence that the home had been inspected by an environmental health officer in January 2006, and that everything was found to be satisfactory at that time. The inspector also reviewed the records of the water temperature checks and health and safety walk rounds that are undertaken regularly. A fire risk assessment was in place and PAT (portable electrical appliance) testing had been completed at the beginning of October 2006. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 2 27 3 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 3 34 3 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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. Refer to Standard YA26 Good Practice Recommendations It is recommended that the bedroom carpet in 1 residents’ bedroom be steam cleaned. Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Southgate Area Office Solar House, 1st Floor 282 Chase Road Southgate London N14 6HA 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 Emmanuel House DS0000069881.V356603.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!