Inspection on 23/05/07 for Farriess Court

This inspection was carried out on 23rd May 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 there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Farriess Court 02/09/08

Farriess Court 09/04/08

Farriess Court 24/05/06

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Farriess Court 103 Boulton Lane Alvaston Derby Derbyshire DE24 0FF Lead Inspector Key Unannounced Inspection 10:00 23rd May 2007 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 Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.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. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Farriess Court Address 103 Boulton Lane Alvaston Derby Derbyshire DE24 0FF 01332 755555 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) Mr Allen William Heath Susan Mary O’Kelly Care Home 26 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (26) of places Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Date of last inspection 24th May 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Farries Court Residential Care Home provides care for up to 26 Older People. The Home is situated within its own grounds, and comprises of an older building, with ground floor and first floor facilities that retains many of its original features, and a more modern ground floor extension that provides 5 single bedrooms. The Home has a communal dining room and two main sitting rooms. Residents are permitted to smoke, but only in a designated area of the Home. However, it is proposed to make the Home a non-smoking establishment in the near future. The Home is positioned between the areas of Alvaston and Allenton, and has access to several GP surgeries. The centre of Alvaston is within walking distance, where a small range of shops can be found. The charges made for a room at Farries Court Care Home range from £276.00 a week to £334.00 a week, dependent on the bedroom provided. A copy of the Commission’s inspection report is available from within the Home. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection took place in just under 6.5 hours. Discussion was held with two Residents, and the records of three Residents were ‘case tracked’. Discussion was also held with the Registered Provider and Manager of the Home, and with one member of the care staff. A number of records were examined, and all of the Residents bedrooms and all public areas of the Home were examined. The Commission’s pre-inspection questionnaire, sent to the Manager, was examined. The Commission’s Residents questionnaire was also sent to a selection of Residents, and five were returned at the time of this inspection. Due to the limitations of the Residents they had, in the main, been completed with the assistance of relatives. They all commented favourably on the Home, some extremely so. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The Registered Providers had improved that the statement of terms and conditions of residency or contract for all new Residents moving to the Home. The Manager has significantly improved the information kept within Residents files. As new Registered Providers of the Home they have significantly improved the condition of the Home throughout. At least 50 of all care staff have now achieved an NVQ level 2 qualification in Care, and all necessary staff have been trained in Food Hygiene. 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. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 1, 2, 3, & 6. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. All new Residents moving to the Home were appropriately assessed prior to their admission, so that they were reassured that their needs would be met. EVIDENCE: The Registered Providers had provided a detailed statement of purpose for the Home together with a Resident’s Guide, which was available in each Residents bedroom. The Guide was well completed, although did not provided the opinions of Residents on what life was like in the Home. The Residents Guide also contained information on how contact could be made with the Commission, the local Social Services Dept and the local Health Authority. The records of three Residents were examined during this inspection and a copy of the statement of terms and conditions of residency or a contract, if purchasing their care privately, was found in each file. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 When new Residents were admitted to the Home, the Manager was provided with a summary of the needs of each person, completed by the Social Services Dept Care Manager supporting each Resident, copies of which were seen. If the Residents were self-funding from the outset, the Manager completed her own summary of needs, which were also seen during the inspection. Standard 6 does not apply to this Home. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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): Standards 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ health and personal care needs were being well met, as demonstrated within care plans. Medication was administered appropriately to meet Residents needs, although improvements were required. EVIDENCE: To help assess Standard 7, the Resident’s Plan of Care, the records of three Residents were examined, for the purpose of case tracking. All of the basic information, concerning each Resident, was found to be in the files examined. That was, their name and date of birth, their preferred name, their next of kin, their GP, Care Manager and Keyworker and their date of entry to the Home. Copies of Manager’s initial assessment of each Resident were found to be available in each file. Copies of the contract, or statement of terms and conditions of residency, signed by each Resident, or their representative, on admission were also available. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 The files contained copies of good ongoing care plans and copies of risk assessments for each Resident. The Manager had also provided information within the files to say what additional needs Residents suffering with dementia had. The files showed that good records of events affecting each Resident were kept by the Home, and the Manager said that the relevant records were read to those Residents with sufficient understanding, at least at monthly intervals of time. The Manager undertook reviews of Residents care needs at 6 monthly intervals. However, where Social Services Depts were involved, they undertook a review annually, which the Manager accepted as one of her reviews. All of the files were easy to read and good entries had been made by the care staff. There was good evidence to show that the Manager or senior care staff, reviewed the files at least at monthly intervals. The files were well organised, with different sections and confidential records were maintained when this was felt to be necessary. Staff were appropriately maintaining the records of Residents health needs. All medication and the method of distributing it to Residents was examined. A good system was found to be in use, although the following issues required attention: A review of some of the Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheets was undertaken and a large number of signature gaps were found. The MAR sheets contained a number of handwritten entries completed by staff from the Home. These additional medications had not been signed by two staff, to confirm the correct entry had been made, and did not contain the name of the Doctor who authorised the medication, or the date on which the new medication was to start/had started. A number of new blister packs had been supplied mid-month, by the Pharmacy used by the Home. The distribution of medication from these new blister packs had not been started in the same position as other blister packs already in use. To ensure the correct distribution of medication, all blister packs and MAR sheets should be in the same location for all medication. Residents were spoken to about life in the Home. They said that staff were very good at listening to their views on how they liked to be cared for and staff would carry out their wishes. They also said that their care needs were always met with dignity and respect – ‘Yes, I don’t have to ask for anything’ ‘Yes, all staff are ok’. As a result, they felt very safe in the Home, and appeared to Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 have a strong sense and appearance of well being – ‘I always make sure that staff do things the way I want’. Staff were spoken to about the care provided in the Home. It was said that Residents were encouraged to do as much as possible for themselves. A number of other issues were discussed with the staff, to which good answers were always given. Residents were also asked about a number of the issues raised and they were able to confirm what staff said, indicating that good care was always provided. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.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): Standards 12, 13, 14 & 15. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents preferred lifestyles were respected by the Home, and Residents were given a wholesome and appealing diet in pleasant surroundings, that enhanced Residents well being. EVIDENCE: Residents were asked about the activities provided in the Home, but they were unable to comment, preferring to spend their time in and around their bedrooms. The Manager and the staff spoken to said that an Activities Coordinator organised events in the Home, attending twice a week to do this. They said that ‘bus trips’ were arranged to take Residents out, fairs and fetes were also arranged and Singers visited the Home on approximately a monthly basis. They said that various games and activities were also played on a weekly basis. Residents said that they decided when they got up and went to bed – ‘I can get up and go to bed when I like; I go to bed at about 10 or 11 o’clock.’ ‘I choose these times, I’m up at 6.15 and I go to bed dependent on what is on the TV, but generally at about 9 or 10 o’clock. One male Resident also said ‘I have one bath a week, (a male member of staff ) does this with me which l Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 like, rather than women staff. He helps me in and out of the bath, but leaves me to bath on my own.’ However, the Manager said that the member of staff stands outside the door of the bathroom, returning when the Resident calls. Relatives and friends of Residents were able to visit at any time, and could always be seen in private - ‘Yes, all who come I can see in private.’ ‘I see (my visitors) in my bedroom’. The staff interviewed also said that relatives could visit at anytime. It was said that Residents could chose where they wanted to see their relatives, in the lounge or in their bedrooms. One of the Residents said that when staff came to the door of his bedroom they knocked and always waited for him to say ‘come in’ before doing so. Residents were able to say that a choice was available at breakfast and teatime meals. However, at dinner time only one meal was offered, although if the meal was disliked an alternative would be offered. The staff spoken to confirmed this. Staff also said that drinks and snacks were always provided between meals for Residents, and that mealtimes were never rushed. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.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): Standards 16 & 18. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Complaints made to the Registered Providers or Manager were addressed to meet Residents needs. The protection policies and procedures provided meant that Residents were well protected. EVIDENCE: Residents spoken to were able to say that if they had a complaint to make they would tell Manager. However, the Residents said that to date they had not had to make a complaint, despite knowing how to do so. The Commission had not received any notice of complaint since the last visit to the Home, in May 2006. Since that visit, the Manager had recorded a number of verbal concerns raised by Residents and visitors. These were reviewed and were found to have been satisfactorily dealt with. Good procedures were seen for both written and verbal complaints. The Registered Providers complaints procedure detailed that all complaints would be responded to by a Registered Provider or the Manager within at least 28 days. The Registered Providers had a Safeguarding Adults procedure that included a ‘Whistle Blowing’ policy. The Home also had a copy of the Public Interest Disclosure Act of 1998, and of the Dept of Health’s policy called ‘No Secrets’ available in the Home. The Manager confirmed that all allegations and Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 incidents of abuse would be promptly followed up and that all actions taken would be recorded. So far, however, this procedure had not been needed. The policies and practices laid down by the Registered Providers ensured that all staff understood physical and verbal aggression by Residents. The Manager also said that a policy was available to staff stating that they could not benefit from Residents wills, although the staff spoken to was not aware of this. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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): Standards 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Home was well maintained throughout, providing all Residents with a safe, comfortable environment in which to live. EVIDENCE: A tour was made of the Home, which included all of the bedrooms of the Residents. The Home was attractively decorated throughout, and the lounges and dining room were pleasant to sit in, and were provided with the appropriate items for the Residents. The bedrooms provided good space and provision for each Resident. The Registered Providers had provided appropriate furnishings in all locations seen during the inspection. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Toilets were easily available to all Residents, were clearly marked, and were provided with handrails where necessary. A call system was available throughout the Home. Most radiators were appropriately guarded, and could be controlled within each bedroom. The Home had appropriate sluicing facilities, and laundry was washed at appropriate temperatures. Since purchasing the Home, the new Registered Providers have greatly improved the facilities and appearance of the Home. However, the following items were seen to still be in need of addressing within the Home: The pull cords to summon staff provided in the toilets hung behind Residents when using the toilet. Therefore, they were not available to use, and so should be re-sited. In some bedrooms the radiators had not been provided with covers to prevent Residents from accidentally scalding themselves. This issue was first raised in January 2006. In bedroom 15, the medic-bath, which has been dysfunctional for many years, should be reviewed. The fire escape from the first floor, at the rear of the building, needed to be kept clear of weeds and long grass at the foot of the staircase in the garden. This issue was outstanding from the inspection report of May 2006. In bedrooms 5, 9 and 10 the broken window sash cords needed to be repaired to allow the windows to be easily opened. This issue was outstanding from the inspection report of January 2006. Bedroom doors throughout the Home had not been fitted with locks that could be operated by Residents from both the inside and outside of the bedroom. When this has been done care staff and domestic staff will need to be provided with masterkeys to allow them entrance to the bedrooms. This issue was outstanding from the inspection report of January 2006. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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): Standards 27, 28, 29 & 30. The quality in this outcome area was Good. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Care staffing were provided and held relevant qualification to meet the needs of Residents. EVIDENCE: A good level of staffing was found to be provided in the Home to meet the needs of Residents. At the time of this inspection it was found that more than 50 of care staff had a qualification of at least NVQ level 2 in Care. The staff spoken to said that the were currently undergoing training to obtain an NVQ level 2 in Care. The recruitment procedure to be followed by the Home was examined and it was found that no new staff had been employed since the last visit made to the Home in May 2006. This very positive position meant that it was not possible to check the recruiting procedure followed, to ensure it met that laid down by Regulation 19 and Schedule 2 of The Care Homes Regulations 2001. The Manager said that new staff would be provided with induction and foundation training. She also said that all care staff were provided with at least three paid days training a year, and a member of the care staff supported this. The records of some of this training was seen. All staff also had an individual training and development assessment and profile. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.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): Standard 31, 33, 35, 36 & 38. The quality in this outcome area was Adequate. This judgement was made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Management arrangements at the Home were not sufficiently robust to ensure that residential care was maintained at a positive standard. EVIDENCE: The Manager was appropriately qualified to manage the Home, having an NVQ level 4 qualification in Management and Care. However, it was found that the Registered Providers were not ‘inspecting’ the Home at monthly intervals, as required by the Care Homes Regulations 2001. The Manager was aware of many of the issues required to address the Quality Assurance information needed in the Home, and indeed had started work on some of them. However, none had been completed or published at the time of this visit to the Home. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 The Manager stated that the Home did not hold any savings money on behalf of Residents. Residents purchases and hairdressing etc were paid by the Home and relatives were then billed for these amounts. The staff member spoken to was asked about the supervision she received from the Manager or other senior staff in the Home. She said that this was done on approximately a monthly basis, when the needs of the Resident, for whom she was keyworker, were discussed. The Manager confirmed that supervision was provided by herself or senior staff. However, she also said that as yet all staff were not included within this process. The training required by the Regulations was examined. This showed that Fire Safety training, First Aid training and Food Hygiene training had been provided for all relevant staff. Moving and Handling training had been provided, but one member of staff still needed this training. The Manager said that Infection Control training was required by all 15 care staff. The Manager was encouraged to ensure that at least one qualified First Aider was on duty on every shift in the home, both day and night. From copies of the Home’s maintenance schedule, forwarded to the Commission prior to the inspection, it was found that all necessary maintenance and repairs were being appropriately addressed. The Manager was able to show that the Home had complied with the majority of legislation applicable to its operation, although she said she did not have information on the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations of 1992 or the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations of 1992. The Manager was not able to show that she had provided risk assessments on all safe working practices of staff; that is for care staff, catering staff and domestic staff, but a start had been made on this issue. However, she had provided a written statement of the policy, organisation and arrangements for maintaining these safe working practices. Finally, the Manager was able to show that all accidents, injuries and incidents of illness or communicable disease were recorded and reported to the relevant government bodies. With the assistance of the Fire Service, fire safety notices were also posted in relevant places around the Home. Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.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 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 X 2 X 3 2 X 2 Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes 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 OP9 Regulation 13.2 Requirement Signature gaps on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheet must be followed up by the Manager. She should indicate on the back of the relevant MAR sheet why the gap occurred and her action when following this up. If an alteration or an additional medication is necessary on the MAR sheet, this must always be signed by two staff, dated and state the name of the Doctor authorising the change to the medication. 2. OP19 to OP26 13, 16 & 23 A number of Requirements needed to be addressed in and around the Home, details of which are including in the section headed Environment Standards 19 – 26. The Registered Providers must provide a written account of their formal ‘inspections’ of the Home, on a monthly basis, following the requirements laid down in Regulation 26 (4) & (5). (This DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 18/07/07 30/09/07 3. OP31 26 18/07/07 Farriess Court Version 5.2 Page 24 issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 24 May 2005) 4. OP33 24 The Registered Providers and Manager must establish and maintain a system for reviewing and improving the quality of care provided in the Home. This must be done by ensuring that Standards 33.1 to 33.7 are addressed. (This issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 5 January 2006) All care staff must receive supervision from the Manager or other senior staff in the Home. The member of care staff identified during the inspection must receive training in Moving and Handling. Fifteen care staff identified during the inspection should receive training in Infection Control. (This issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 24 May 2006) 30/09/07 5. OP36 18(2) 18/07/07 6. OP38 13(5) 30/09/07 7. OP38 18(c)(i) 30/11/07 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. Refer to Standard OP1 OP9 No. 1. 2. Good Practice Recommendations The Residents Guide should contain the views of Residents on what it is like to live in the Home. When the Pharmacy supplies new blister packs of DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Farriess Court medication to the Home mid-month, medication should be distributed from this blister pack from the same position as all other blister packs currently in use in the Home. 3. OP15 A choice of at least two meals should be provided at the main lunchtime meal of the day. (This issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 24 May 2005) The Manager should ensure that all staff are made aware of the Registered Providers policy stating that staff cannot assist in the making of or benefit in anyway from Residents wills. Formal supervision should be provided for all care staff at least 6 times a year. Sufficient senior staff should be trained as First Aiders to ensure that at least one First Aider is on duty on each shift, both day and night. (This issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 24 May 2006) The Registered Providers must ensure the Home complies with the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992. (This issue is outstanding from the inspection report of 5 January 2006) Risk assessments on all working practice topics for care staff, catering staff and domestic staff, should be provided in order to ensure that significant findings are recorded and acted upon. 4. OP18 5. 6. OP36 OP38 7. OP38 Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Derbyshire Area Office Cardinal Square Nottingham Road Derby DE1 3QT 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 Farriess Court DS0000065783.V336809.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!