Inspection on 22/11/07 for Ethel Road (7)

This inspection was carried out on 22nd November 2007.

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

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 3 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Ethel Road (7) 21/04/10

Ethel Road (7) 28/10/09

Ethel Road (7) 23/10/08

Ethel Road (7) 03/05/07

Ethel Road (7) 09/10/06

Ethel Road (7) 03/02/06

Ethel Road (7) 21/10/05

Ethel Road (7) 24/01/05

Ethel Road (7) 11/05/04

Similar services:

Thorndene

Insight - Eastchurch

Southfields

Magenta

Seabourne House

33 St John`s Church Road

Dovedale Court

Lyncol House

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Ethel Road (7) 7 Ethel Road Ashford Middlesex TW15 3RB Lead Inspector Joan Browne Unannounced Inspection 22nd November 2007 11:15 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Ethel Road (7) Address 7 Ethel Road Ashford Middlesex TW15 3RB 01784 240646 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) Mrs Victoria Charlton Mr Vaughan Charlton Mrs Victoria Charlton Care Home 1 Category(ies) of Learning disability (1) registration, with number of places Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The age/age range of the persons to be accommodated will be 18 - 35 years The gender of those accommodated will be Male Date of last inspection 3rd May 2007 Brief Description of the Service: The home is registered as a care home within the service user category: Learning Disability. The home is registered to provide personal care for one male resident. The accommodation within the home is a communal lounge, dining room, conservatory and domestic style kitchen. The resident has a single bedroom with an en-suite bathroom and toilet. The service is privately owned providing a caring and supportive environment and is run as an ordinary domestic household. The fees are approximately £531.09 per week. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was a key inspection of the service that was carried out on 22 November 2007. The manager was given less than twenty-four hours notice to prepare for this inspection. The inspection took 3.3/4 hours to complete and was carried out by Joan Browne regulatory inspector The inspection took into account detailed information provided by the service. We looked at how well the service was meeting the standards set by the government and has in this report made judgements about the standard of the service. The person using the service care plan was examined and health and safety records were examined. Time was spent speaking to the individual alone and with the manager. A telephone conversation was held with the person using the service advocate. From the evidence seen it was considered that the service was meeting the individual’s diverse needs. The inspector would like to thank the resident and the registered manager for their co-operation and hospitality during the inspection. What the service does well: We spoke to the person using the service about the care he was receiving. The individual was happy with the care provision and sees himself as a family member. We spoke to the person using the service about his involvement with decisionmaking. The individual said that he was able to make decisions about his life with assistance if needed from his advocate or the manager. We spoke to the person using the service about his lifestyle. The individual said that he was enabled to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. He is seen as part of the local community and is supported to maintain and develop relationships with people of his choice. We spoke to the person using the service about his personal and healthcare support. The individual was confident that his personal and healthcare needs were adequately met and the manager respected his privacy and dignity. The person using the service said that the manager listens to his views and he felt safe living in the home. The person using the service live in a homely comfortable and safe environment, which is clean and hygienic. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The person using the service was confident that the care home was meeting his diverse needs and supporting him fully. This is because the manager has been caring for the individual for over ten years and identified needs were kept under review to ensure there were being met. EVIDENCE: The manager and her husband had been foster carers to the resident. When the individual reached the age of eighteen years they made arrangements to register the home as a care home to enable the resident to continue living with them. The manager said that the resident has always been treated as a family member. The resident confirmed that he was treated as a family member and referred to the manager’s two sons as his brothers. There was no preadmission assessment seen. The home was promoting the service of an advocate to support the resident to make choices and be involved with all aspects of his care. The notes from the individual’s recent review meeting were seen, which reflected that the resident’s identified and diverse care needs were being met. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 People who use the service experience adequate quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The person using the service was confident that he was involved in decisions about his life. However, risk assessments supporting the individual to promote an independent lifestyle would need to be developed in a person centred format to ensure that choice is not limited and any potential risks and hazards identified, action is taken to minimise them. EVIDENCE: There was a care plan in place that was not person centred but outlined how the individual’s needs and daily routine were being met. The plan was written in plain English and easy to follow. The resident informed the inspector that he was very happy with the care and support he was receiving from the manager and his advocate. It was noted that daily occurrence sheets were in place. Entries were not recorded on a daily basis. The manager said that changes to the individual’s daily routine were minimum and as a result entries were recorded once or twice weekly. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 There was an entry recorded in the care plan, which could be perceived as derogatory. This was discussed with the manager during the inspection. It is recommended that that manager should be mindful when recording entries in the individual’s care plan to ensure that it is not perceived as derogatory. There was evidence seen confirming that regular reviews of the individual’s care needs were taking place, which involved the care manager, resident, manager and the advocate. It was noted at the individual’s recent review meeting that the manager was advised by the care manager to develop risk assessments for the resident relating to choking, nutrition and falls. This was because the resident was only able to eat soft foods and experienced difficulty with swallowing and was prone to choking. The individual had also sustained an injury when out on an outing. At the time of the inspection risk assessments were not in place. It is required that risk assessments must be developed to ensure that there is a plan of action in place for any identified potential risks. The resident confirmed that he was able to make decisions about his life with assistance from the manager and his advocate. He stated that he had confidence in the manager and his advocate who have both played a significant role in supporting him to maintain his independence. The advocate was spoken to and she was confident that the resident’s views were always taken into consideration. The resident was not managing his finances because he was not able to. However, the individual was in receipt of a weekly allowance of £20.45 from the placing authority and was able to spend it on personal items such as DVDs, stationery, outings and eating out in his favourite fast food restaurant. There was a transaction sheet in place recording all incoming and outgoing payments. The information recorded was not easy to follow. This was discussed with the manager during the inspection. It is recommended that the information recorded on the individual’s financial transaction sheet should be written clearly to ensure that it is clear and easy to follow. The manager said that she often requests the resident’s advocate to check the transaction sheet, which should promote transparency. There was no risk assessment in place supporting the resident to promote an independent lifestyle. This was discussed with the manager during the inspection who said that the resident does not use public transport unescorted and was taken by car when attending college, work or a social activity. It is required that the manager develops a risk assessment supporting the individual to maintain an independent lifestyle. This would ensure that any potential risks and hazards presented are identified and action taken to minimise them. It is acknowledged that risk assessments were in place Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 relating to emergency evacuation, bathing and the individual having to wait in the porch if the manager was not in. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The service ensures that the individual is seen as part of the local community and able to take part in activities that are appropriate to his age and culture thus ensuring that his diverse needs would be met. Meals and snacks are provided which meet his individualised needs. EVIDENCE: The resident confirmed that he was attending college four times a week and was undertaking training in health and safety, literacy and healthy eating. He said that he loved animals and was working as a volunteer in the local royal society for the prevention of cruelty to animals (RSPCA) shop. The manager supports the individual to be part of the local community. He has lots of friends and makes use of the facilities and activities in the local community. He goes out regularly on shopping trips to purchase personal items. He has regular outings to the cinema and theatre and is enabled to visit the local pub for a drink and his favourite fast food restaurant. The resident Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 also said that he attends a local club on a weekly basis and participates in karaoke competitions. The resident confirmed that the manager supports him to maintain links with his family members and friends. He visits his mother every other weekend and is able to choose whom he wishes to see. He has a befriender who visits him every other week and takes him on outings to the cinema and his favourite fast food restaurant. He said that he had a special friend who was able to visit him. The resident has his own bedroom and bathroom, which are situated on the ground floor and he is expected to help keep these areas clean and tidy. He is able to put away his laundry and change his bed linen. He has been living in this unique residential setting for a number of years and feels very much part of the family and has unrestricted access to all areas of the family home. He said that he enjoys watching horror movies and playing his favourite music. He was also very much attached to the family pet dogs and allows them in his bedroom. Mealtime was not observed, as the main meal is prepared in the evening. The manager said that the resident has three meals daily and is provided with drinks and snacks throughout the day. He was able to help himself to snacks if he wished to at anytime. It was reflected in the care plan that the resident had difficulty with swallowing and soft foods should be provided. The manager stated that she provides soft foods like mashed potatoes, mince, fish and lasagne and pastas. The resident said he enjoys his meals and also enjoys eating out at his favourite fast food restaurant. It was noted that one day a week the resident prepares his own meals at college and brings it home to be eaten in the evening. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 People who use the service experience good quality outcome in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to this service. The service ensure that the health and personal care provided to the person using the service is responsive and consistent based on the individual’s diverse needs. EVIDENCE: The care plan seen reflected that the resident was able to wash and dress himself without assistance. The manager assists the individual with washing his hair and shaving. There was evidence seen which indicated that he regularly visits the barber to have a haircut. The resident confirmed that he was able to choose when he wished to rise and retire. He was confident that the manager respected his privacy and dignity and was happy with the support he was receiving. The resident was registered with a general practitioner and has access to health care and other specialist treatment via the general practitioner. There was evidence seen in the care documentation reflecting that the resident was supported by the manager to attend hospital appointments. The manager Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 informed the inspector that she escorts the resident monthly to the hospital to have blood tests. Six monthly dental and yearly optical appointments were maintained. The resident said that he was not on any prescribed medication. However, he recently had to undertake a procedure to have a supa pubic catheter inserted, which he was managing with support from the district nurses and assistance from the manager. A requirement was made at the previous inspection for the manager or her husband to undertake training in the safe handling and administration of medication. It is pleasing to report that the requirement had been complied with. The manager’s husband had undertaken training in the safe handling and administration of medication. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.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 People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The individual was confident if he had to raise a concern it would be looked into and action taken to put it right. The manager had undertaken updated training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults, which should ensure that the individual was protected from any potential harm or abuse. EVIDENCE: The resident said that he was aware how to make a complaint. He said that if was not happy he would speak to the manager or his advocate. The Commission has not received any complaints about the service. The home has an up to date copy of Surrey Multi Agency safeguarding Procedures and an easy read summary of keeping people safe document issued by the department of health. At the last inspection a requirement was made for the manager to undertake training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adult. It is pleasing to report that the requirement had been met. The service has not reported any allegations regarding safeguarding of vulnerable adult. There has not been any safeguarding of vulnerable adult concerns reported to the Commission about the service. As mentioned previously in Standard 7 the home maintains a transaction sheet of the residents’ finances. A recommendation has been made in this report for the sheet to be more organised to ensure that it is clear and easy to follow. The resident has an advocate who supports him with his finances and other Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 aspects of his care needs. The advocate was spoken to and she confirmed that the resident was well cared for. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 & 30 People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The service provides a safe, well-maintained and comfortable environment, which should ensure that the person using the service lives in a home that is clean comfortable, pleasant and hygienic, encouraging independence. EVIDENCE: The home is a family home. The resident’s bedroom is situated on the ground floor and there is a separate toilet and bathroom. The resident said that he liked his bedroom. The room was personalised with family photographs and posters reflecting the resident’s personality. The room was clean and tidy. The manager said that plans were in place for the individual’s bedroom to be redecorated. The floor covering was going to be replaced and the resident had specifically requested a full-length mirror for the wall to look at himself, which was going to be provided. At the last inspection a requirement was made for the toilet on the ground floor next to the kitchen to be reviewed, because it did not have a door. It is Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 pleasing to report that the toilet was removed and the space utilised into a laundry area. The home was clean, hygienic and smelt fresh on the day of the inspection. The resident informed the inspector that he assists with cleaning the walls and floor in his bedroom to ensure that they are clean and free from dirt and dust. He also said that he had access to all areas of the home and was able to entertain his friends in the lounge or in the privacy of his bedroom. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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, 34 & 35 People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The person using the service is supported by the manager who has been undertaking the appropriate training. This should ensure that the individual’s diverse needs would be fully met. EVIDENCE: There are no staff employed in the home, the registered manager is the sole person who cares for the resident and her family. The resident has contact with an advocate and a befriender who both support him. The manager said that the volunteer and the befriender have been subject to enhanced criminal record bureau checks. The individuals’ employers carried out these checks. At the last inspection a requirement was made for the manager to undertake training to ensure the home was managed appropriately. It is pleasing to report that the manager has completed training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Written evidence was seen confirming provisional booking for her to undertake a food handling and hygiene training course in December 2007 and a first aid course in January 2008. She is currently undertaking a one-year management-training course, which should equip her with the Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 appropriate skills and knowledge to provide an effective service delivery based on positive outcomes for the resident. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 & 43 People who use the service experience adequate quality outcomes in this area. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. The management and administration practices in the home need to be consistent to ensure that the person using the service safety and welfare are promoted and protected. EVIDENCE: The manager has been caring for the resident for more than ten years. She has had experience working with people with a physical disability and learning disability in a residential and day care setting. She has a B-Tec certificate in social care and is currently undergoing a certificate in management studies. There was evidence seen to indicate that the manager was being pro-active and undertaking periodic training to update her knowledge and skills to support her to care for the resident’s diverse needs. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 The home does not have a quality assurance system in place but the resident has an advocate whom he sees regularly and is able to speak on his behalf if required. The service maintains a record for checking smoke detectors. The manager said that checks are carried out weekly. On the day of the inspection it was noted that the battery in one of the smoke detectors required replacing. It is recommended that the manager should keep a stock of batteries to ensure that batteries are replaced as and when required. Written evidence was seen indicating that the service had a contract agreement with a reputable provider to service the gas and electrical appliances. The service record seen was up to date and a service check of the boiler and other appliances was imminent. The insurance certificate seen expired 14 October 2007. The service must obtain an up to date certificate providing adequate cover to care for the resident in relation to death, injury, public liability, damage or other loss. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 X 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 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 X 33 X 34 3 35 2 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 3 X 2 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 2 X 2 X X 2 2 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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. 1 Standard YA6 Regulation 13(4)(c) Requirement Risk assessments relating to the prevention of falls, choking and nutrition must be developed to ensure any unnecessary risks to the person using the service health and safety are identified and so far a possible eliminated. A risk assessment must be developed supporting the person using the service to maintain an independent lifestyle. This should ensure that any potential risks and hazards presented are identified and action taken to minimise them. The service must obtain an up to date insurance certificate providing adequate cover for the person using the service in relation to death, injury, public liability damage or other loss. Timescale for action 12/01/08 2 YA9 13(4)(c) 12/01/08 3 YA43 25(2)(e) 12/01/08 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 No. 1 Refer to Standard YA6 Good Practice Recommendations The manager should be mindful when recording entries in the person using the service care plan to ensure that it is not perceived as derogatory. The information recorded on the person using the service financial transaction sheet should be better arranged to ensure that it is clear and easy to follow. In the interests of the person using the service safety the service should keep spare batteries to ensure that the smoke detector batteries can be changed as and when required. 2 YA7 3 YA42 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Maidstone Office The Oast Hermitage Court Hermitage Lane Maidstone ME16 9NT 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 Ethel Road (7) DS0000013530.V345886.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!