Inspection on 20/02/07 for Field House

This inspection was carried out on 20th February 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

Field House 17/02/09

Field House 28/02/06

Field House 12/10/05

Field House 18/02/05

Field House 27/08/04

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Queensmount

Poldhu

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Field House Cannards Grave Road Shepton Mallet Somerset BA4 4LU Lead Inspector Loli Ruiz Unannounced Inspection 20th February 2007 09:45 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 Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Field House Address Cannards Grave Road Shepton Mallet Somerset BA4 4LU 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) 01749 342006 01749 345146 linda.tungate@somersetcare.co.uk Somerset Care Limited Mrs Linda Christine Tungate Care Home 39 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (39) of places Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 28/02/06 Brief Description of the Service: Field House provides residential care for up to 39 service users within the older people category of registration. Day care is also provided for which a designated member of staff is employed. Field House is part of Somerset Care Limited. The registered manager is Mrs Linda Tungate. The home is set well back from the road with a long drive and circular front garden. There are parking areas to the front and side of the house. Large, attractive gardens and patio areas surround the home. These are accessible to service users from a number of ground floor rooms. The home consists of a listed building with later ground floor extensions. Service users’ accommodation is on four floors serviced by a passenger lift. There are steps to a small number of rooms. These would not be accessible to people with mobility problems. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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 on 20th February as part of the planned programme of inspections for year ending 31st March 2007. The last inspection was announced and took place on 28th February 2006. The inspector would like to thank the manager, Mrs Linda Tungate, the deputy manager, staff and service users for their welcome and assistance during this inspection. The inspector aimed to inspect all key standards and spoke with residents and staff in the home, toured the premises, observed practice on the day and inspected a variety of records. The inspector found that residents’ expressed experience of living in the home was positive, that staff identified with the ethos of the home and appreciated the support received from the management, that the home was generally well maintained and that the home was well managed. What the service does well: Feedback from people who live at Field House continues very positive. They indicate that staff are responsive to their needs, that they feel comfortable about raising issues that concern them with the manager knowing that agreement and resolutions of problems usually followed. Residents were well informed about the activities on the day and indicated that outings and events to mark special occasions continue to be organised. Everyone spoken with indicated that the quality of the food served in the home was good and they appreciated having optional dishes. Observed interaction between staff and service users was warm, respectful and friendly. The home had no staff vacancies. Staff absences were covered by the homes own staff. Files of staff inspected evidenced that appropriate recruitment and vetting procedures are followed. Staff spoken with continue to praise the support they receive from the management and said that they liked working in the home. The home continues to exceed the national Minimum Standard of 50 NVQ qualified staff. In addition to mandatory training, staff have received training in Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 specialist topics such as dementia and the management of behaviours that challenge the service. The home was generally well maintained, clean and tidy on the day of inspection. All records inspected were complete, well organised and up to date. The manager was congratulated by the good management of records and by the efficient retrieval system in operation. 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. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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 Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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): 1, 3, 5, 6. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Prospective service users and visitors have available enough information about the home prominently displayed by the entrance hall. They are also encouraged to visit and spend time in the home prior to deciding about coming in. Prospective residents have their needs assessed prior to coming to the home. The home does not provide intermediate care services. EVIDENCE: The inspector looked through the information provided about the home, the statement of purpose/service users’ guide folder. This included all necessary information and included the last inspection report and complaints procedure. On the sideboard was also the photographic guide to the home prepared since the last inspection with many examples of aspects of the life in the home. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 A number of service users described their introduction to the home and this had included visits and meals in the home before coming in. They had often visited with a relative. There is a trial period for people to test the home before permanency is confirmed at the first review of their placement. The manager indicated that all residents have contracts. These were not inspected, as they are stored on a separate file from the care records. A selection of care records were inspected, which evidenced that, an assessment of needs had been carried out prior to admission. On some records seen the home’s own assessment added to a full community care assessment and/or a nursing assessment. The manager indicated that the home has a number of “step down” beds for people who are ready to be discharged from hospital but would benefit from a period of support before going home. Mrs Tungate confirmed that these service users do not require any specialised intermediate care. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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): 7, 8, 9,10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users agree with their plan of care that includes their physical, personal and social care needs and from the health monitoring and arrangements for accessing health care services. Service users are protected by the home’s management of medication and by the monitoring that the pharmacist undertakes at 6 monthly intervals. Service users indicate that staff members in the home are considerate and sensitive to their needs and wishes. EVIDENCE: The care and support records of four service users were inspected. These included those of new admissions and of those with specific or complex needs. All records seen included good assessments of needs and risk areas. The plans of care were detailed with instructions for staff on how to meet needs and minimise risks. Health monitoring tools were included and also a record of health professional visits and a social history. Plans had been reviewed Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 generally, at monthly intervals with the last review just over a month before the inspection. Care records had the signature of the resident, when able, or that of their advocate or main family member. Two of the residents evidenced how they discuss their care plan with staff. During discussions with some service users they also indicated good access to health care professionals for specific medical conditions and to periodic health checks. A local GP was seen visiting the home. The manager explained that service users keep their GP if local and those from outside the area usually have one of the nearest practitioners who performs periodic routine visits as well as responding to calls from the home. Mrs Tungate judges this as very positive because residents prefer a familiar face and a good rapport has been established with the GP. Service users said that they were very happy in the home and indicated that staff were caring and responsive to their needs and wishes. Medication was observed being appropriately administered during the lunch meal. The medication storage and records were seen and found well managed. No gaps were seen in MARS and hand written entries had two signatures. The home has changed its pharmacy supplier but continues using a blister pack system that was considered easier to manage than that of the previous supplier. The deputy manager informed the inspector that no one was on controlled drugs at the time. The CD book was at hand and showed wellmaintained entries, appropriately signed for times when residents have had such drugs. There was a duplicated returns book. The fridge stored insulin pens and temperatures were being monitored. Staff had received training for supporting service users who had insulin dependent diabetes. The deputy manager confirmed that all recommendations from the pharmacist’s visit of 14/02/07 have been complied with. A copy was provided for CSCI records. Records evidenced that some service users part-medicate with items such as inhalers. Senior staff have received medication training and updates as evidenced by the training records provided. Service users spoke highly of the staff and management in the home. They appear to have a personal positive relationship with the manager whom one described as “ so very caring”. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from a choice of social and recreational activities, organised in consultation with them and which they are free to attend. Staff members assist with maintaining contact with relatives and friends whom they sometimes visit and with whom they go out. Staff check that the way they assist service users with activities of daily living meet with their approval. Service users enjoy a good healthy diet and receive the assistance they need when eating. EVIDENCE: The inspector had contact with the majority of service users in the public areas of the home and had conversations with 12 of them. Some service users were well informed of the activities going on in the home and of the menu of the day that they said had read on the notice boards. Others explained how there is a monthly Church service when a pianist comes and plays the piano, others Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 described the various activities and special events to mark seasonal and other festivities. They also indicated that trips out take place. Service users described being visited by relatives and some going out with them. The inspector observed a relative and a friend visiting, and also a staff member coming to introduce her new baby to residents. The inspector read on the entrance of the home a notice inviting relatives to a “residents and relatives meeting” early in March. A previous notice showed that this is a regular event. During the day the inspector had plenty of opportunity to witness staff members checking with residents their agreement to whatever activity was being undertaken. One service user said, “you don’t need to worry, we are well looked after here”. Two service users indicated that staffing is sometimes stretched and thought that the reason for: “ I often have to wait for staff to cream my legs” and another“ I keep telling them about the next bedroom loud TV but it goes on”, however these two residents also said “they are really good and kind. It is really nice here” and all others spoken with said that staff were very good, would do anything to make them happy and that the care and food served were very good. They also appreciated having the opportunity to choose alternatives to the main menu. The inspector sat in the main house dining room while the midday meal was being served. This consisted of chicken pie, broccoli and potatoes served in good portions. Diabetic and fat-free diets were being catered for. A choice of cold drinks was offered. The attractive sweet trolley had a choice of puddings and fresh fruit. The meal was relaxed and staff were at hand to serve the meals and assist. One service user was being fed. After lunch the inspector noticed service users staying in the room talking with each other. They were also waiting for the afternoon’s activity tossing pancakes. The inspector observed also the meal being taken to the unit. The same diet was being served and service users were attended by staff there. A service user had chosen to eat in the bedroom. During the morning the inspector observed hot and cold drinks served. Menus provided show that a good balanced diet is served in the home. The inspector briefly met the cook. Cooks in the home have undertaken catering courses. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16,18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home’s complaints procedure is available in the hall and any complaints are dealt with appropriately and promptly. Service users are protected by the recruitment and vetting of new staff and also by the supervision systems in the home. Service users benefit from the manager’s open and approachable style and by frequent contact with her. EVIDENCE: There had been one complaint since the last inspection regarding a bedroom with inadequate heating. This had resulted on an additional heater being provided in the person’s bedroom. The heater was subsequently found hazardous for the needs of the person and was replaced by a high electric heater. The manager has consulted the fire officer and has prepared appropriate risk assessments around this problem. There had been no other complaints. Discussions with staff and residents evidenced that service users did not find it difficult to discuss issues that concern them with the manager and staff indicated that the management were very approachable and welcoming and would not hesitate to discuss with them any concern. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Staff files evidenced that appropriate POVA and CRB checks are carried out and that an appropriate induction to the care sector is provided. POVA` clearance is sought before staff begin work. In addition the home has good formal and informal support systems, regular supervision and an annual appraisals. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,20,21,22,24,25,26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from a generally well maintained and comfortable home that has spacious communal areas and good attractive gardens. Service users bedrooms are also comfortable and fully personalised. All areas accessible to residents have call bells installed and there are adapted communal bathrooms and a passenger lift. Service users live in a home that is mostly maintained in a tidy and clean condition but also with a few areas in need of improvement. Systems in operation for the control of the spread of infection were observed. EVIDENCE: Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The home is located close to the town centre set back from a busy road and surrounded by large attractive gardens that are accessible from the house. Local facilities are within walking distance for physically fit and traffic aware service users. Inside there are spacious and comfortable communal rooms that provide a good choice for residents. All floors are accessible by a passenger lift. Private accommodation varies in size and facilities. Some rooms are very large with en-suite facilities. Some of these are previous double rooms now used for single occupancy. Bedrooms are generally well furnished, personalised, with good light and homely and all have washing facilities. Since the last inspection some bedrooms had been redecorated and some good quality carpets have been laid. Two rooms were rather small and one of these, used for respite, was poorly maintained with torn bed covers, stained armchair and a sad looking carpet. One room with a new carpet smelled of urine. The spacious communal rooms include two dining rooms. There is a grand entrance hall with a spiral staircase that is most attractive. The paintwork of the doorframe from one of the lounges had been badly scratched by wheelchairs or trolleys. The carpet just outside the lift on the ground floor, leading to the dining room, had large stains and possibly difficult to clean due to its poor quality. The large dining room has been fitted with a good quality carpet and had attractive furniture and curtains. WCs and bathrooms are adapted to meet recognised needs and mobile hoisting equipment. Two bathrooms have been fully refurbished since the last inspection. One has a new bath, tiling and flooring and well equipped new hairdressers side. The other is a new walk-in shower room. The communal WCs downstairs had unpleasant odours and also the area just outside them. The laundry has had new drying equipment since the last inspection. The location of this large and unwelcoming room continues to present a problem for staff that have to go out of a very warm home to the cold outside. The manager explained the difficulties involved with providing some kind of shelter walkway as this would impact on access to the day centre. She continues to seek for a solution and this is recommended. The management of the control of spread of infection appeared well managed with all relevant equipment and materials available and in use. Water safety is carried out by a specialist company once a month. This includes testing for legionella bacteria and water temperatures of the boilers and key hot taps. Staff record the temperature of every bath and the manager confirmed that this is the temperature of the hot taps output, before any mixing. This showed that temperatures were around 400 C. All taps are fitted with fail-safe-valves. The two new baths had just been commissioned and had not yet been used so there were no records for them. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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): 27, 28, 29, 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The service continues to provide staff who are suitably trained and in adequate numbers. Service users are protected by the recruitment procedures in the home. EVIDENCE: The home was said to be full with 36 residents- although registered for 39- due to using double rooms for single occupancy. There were no staff vacancies but three staff had been recruited since October 2006 and their files were selected for inspection. Staff and management indicated that the home does not use agency staff and that the home’s own relief team and staff members are able to cover absences. Copies of rotas were provided. The home provides approved in-house first induction for staff who are then entered for the company’s central induction and registered for NVQ training. The home continues to exceed the minimum requirement and has over 60 staff with NVQ qualifications at different levels. The training chart evidenced that the home provides all staff with mandatory training and also with specialist training to meet service users needs and the needs of staff identified during supervision and annual appraisals. The training chart lists courses such as dementia, diabetes, managing challenging behaviours and denture care. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Staff files evidenced that robust recruitment procedures continue and included completed application forms, Job profile, 2 written references, POVA checks prior to commencing work, CRB checks, Induction and supervision notes for two of them as the third person had only just started. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from a well managed home and from a manager who provides opportunities for residents and relatives to contribute to the running of the home. Service users appreciate the staff’s helpful attitudes and speak highly of them. Staff are provided with the necessary training and support to enable them to meets service users’ needs. Records in the home are maintained up-to-date, organised to an excellent standard and securely kept. Service users and staff benefit from a safe home with some improvements recommended under NMS 26. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 EVIDENCE: Mrs Tungate is an experienced and qualified manager. Mrs Tungate has completed an NVQ 4. Service users and staff spoken with provided very positive feedback of the management of the home and indicated that the manager was involved and approachable. Service users also indicated that staff were very helpful and considered themselves well looked after. In addition to regular supervision and appraisals the manager organises regular meetings with staff and also with residents and their relatives. The inspector congratulated Mrs Tungate for the effective record keeping system maintained. This enabled a fast retrieval of records that were very well organised and up-to-date. Records seen included: *Medication *Care records *Fire Log and instruction *Maintenance of energy systems and compliance with LOLER *Water systems checks *Training and supervision of staff *Recruitment, vetting and staff induction *Menus *Activities *Management of service users cash *The pre-inspection questionnaire *The statement of purpose/ service users guide *Registration and insurance certificates The records of residents’ cash kept in the home was well maintained except that moneys out had only one signature. It was recommended that when money is taken out, the balance be checked and signed by a second staff member. Recommendations were made under NMS 26. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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 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 X 3 X 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 4 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 3 3 X 3 3 4 3 Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard OP26 Good Practice Recommendations It is recommended that the location of the laundry room (Outside the main building) be reviewed. Precious unmet recommendation. The management should ensure that the malodours in communal and private areas discussed are investigated and all necessary action is taken to prevent them. This may involve the refurbishment and replacement of floor coverings in communal WCs downstairs. Malodours were also identified at the last inspection. A badly stained carpet in a passing area (By lift downstairs) should be cleaned and maintained clean. If carpet not responding to cleaning then it should be replaced. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 2. OP35 It is recommended that when money is taken out of service users cash accounts held in the home, the balance be checked and signed by a second staff member. Field House DS0000016014.V320915.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Somerset Records Management Unit Ground Floor Riverside Chambers Castle Street Taunton TA1 4AL 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 Field House DS0000016014.V320915.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!