CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65
Garfield Grange Lelley Road Preston Hull East Yorkshire HU12 8TX Lead Inspector
David Blackburn Key Unannounced Inspection 12th & 15th July 2006 08:30 Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.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 Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.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. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION
Name of service Garfield Grange Address Lelley Road Preston Hull East Yorkshire HU12 8TX 01482 896230 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) Milbury Care Services Limited Post Vacant Care Home 12 Category(ies) of Learning disability (12) registration, with number of places Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION
Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 5th January 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Garfield Grange is a purpose built centre situated on the outskirts of the small village of Preston some 6 miles from the city of Hull. There is no public transport service to or from the premises. The site offers two facilities, a large detached two-storey house and a smaller bungalow to the rear. Garfield Grange gives respite care to a maximum of twelve guests at any one time. The large detached house provides eight single bedrooms and the bungalow a further four. There are sufficient communal areas, toilets and bathrooms in each location. Specialist lifting, moving and safety equipment is provided as necessary. Garfield Grange offers short term accommodation for adults with a learning disability and associated health and behavioural problems including some challenging behaviour. The staff seek to provide a holistic regime offering personal care, help, advice and guidance with daily living skills and activities, a catering service, a laundry service and domestic and cleaning services. Activities are offered both on and off site. The properties are owned by Milbury Care Services who also provide the care input. A Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide are available in the home. Copies are on display in the entrance hall. A copy of this report will be included when published. The fee level advised at the time of inspection was around £600 per week depending on assessed needs and level of care required. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY
This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection on which this report is based was the first to be carried out in the inspection year 2006 to 2007. The site visit was carried out over two days with a total time at the home of eight hours. This was complemented by a number of hours preparation time off site. The focus of the inspection was on the key standards. A number of bedrooms, communal areas and services, for example the laundry facilities and kitchen were inspected. An examination was made of some service users’ care records, the home’s policies and procedures and other documents, for example staff records. Discussions were held with a number of service users and relatives all in confidence. Care Managers, general Medical Practitioners and some relatives had been contacted for their views prior to the site visit. The comments and observations made are included within the relevant sections of this report. The majority of the service users were unable to enter into any meaningful discussion and generally gave one-word answers or made gestures. Garfield Grange admits a total of 100 guests on a respite basis over the course of a year with a maximum of 12 at any one time. There were no permanent service users. The respite service was rather underused during weekdays but often full or oversubscribed on weekends. One site visit day was at a weekend to meet the service users. What the service does well:
Service users appeared happy and well cared for. Although the majority were unable to enter into discussion or only responded with one-word answers, they were relaxed and enjoyed a good rapport with staff. One visitor said “If I’d have known it was this good, I would have used it for my relative years ago.” Another visitor stated “My relative has been in a number of homes for short term care. While they were good, this is the best.” Good assessment procedures were available should a placement be required in the home. These procedures should ensure any person admitted would have their personal needs, hopes and aspirations fully identified and understood. A well-defined care planning system was in operation that was easy to follow and understand. The information on each service user clearly detailed their needs and how they would be met. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Although the majority of those who used the respite service were unable to verbalise their wishes, choices and preferences, great attention had been paid to the different forms of communication they used including gestures, facial expressions and sounds other than words. This had meant that some feedback was gained from service users and their agreement or otherwise given to any planned course of action. A relative said “I find the care given is always very good.” Although the premises were rather isolated, service users were encouraged to make full use of wider community facilities and amenities through regular excursions in the minibus. Visitors were welcomed though infrequent given the nature of the service offered. One visitor said “I usually call to collect my relative and am always made welcome.” A balanced and generally nutritious diet was offered with staff well aware of service users’ individual likes and dislikes. Specialist crockery and cutlery was readily available. Personal assistance was given quietly and discreetly. Service users said the food “was nice.” Service users were offered personal and health care in a manner that met their requirements. The registered provider’s policies and procedures on medication were being followed to further promote service users’ overall wellbeing. A relative said “ The care on offer here is excellent. You couldn’t want for better.” Services users were assured of protection from harm through good policies and procedures designed for their safety. Staff’s understanding of adult protection issues further promoted services users’ safety. Both premises were clean, warm, and free from offensive odours. Proper attention was given to the maintenance of hygiene. This gave service users a pleasant environment in which to live. Although there had been a number of new staff appointments, service users were cared for by a competent and motivated staff team. The employment of known bank staff had ensured services users had the required care input on a consistent basis. A relative said “Staff are very helpful and friendly.” Appropriate attention had been given to matters of health and safety to ensure the home was a safe place in which to live and work. What has improved since the last inspection?
An individual and detailed daily record of the care given, activities undertaken and any other important event or occurrence affecting a service user was now maintained to show how needs were being met. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 The Acting Manager had obtained a copy of the revised multi agency protocol for the protection of vulnerable adults. A simplified version for staff use and a copy on computer disc that could be used for individual or collective training were also available. Improvements had been made to the premises. New furniture and carpets had been supplied. A new walk-in shower had been provided to the upper floor bathroom in Garfield Grange to ensure service users could easily access this facility. The requirements of the fire officer and environmental health officer had been addressed and resolved providing a safe environment for service users. 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.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1, 2 and 5. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users and their representatives had the information available to make an informed decision about admission to the home. EVIDENCE: The Statement of Purpose, Service User Guide and Service User Contract (terms and conditions of residence) were readily available. The Service User Guide was written in plain English in a large bold typeface with good use made of pictures and colour. The information clearly stated that discriminatory behaviour, in any form, by anyone, would not be tolerated. On the case files examined the initial assessment and care plan had been drawn up by a Care Manager of the placing authority. This information would be scrutinised and a preliminary decision made as to whether or not the assessed needs of the prospective service user could be met. If it was felt needs could be met, the appropriate arrangements would be made for the introduction of the service user to the home. The registered provider had devised an assessment pro forma to be used in conjunction with any assessment carried out by workers from the placing authority. This pro forma was comprehensive and detailed in the information to be given about any prospective service user.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Individual Needs and Choices
The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There was a clear and consistent care planning system in place that provided staff with the information needed to appropriately meet service users needs. EVIDENCE: A number of case files and care plans were examined. They were well organised and easy to follow. The files seen contained the relevant information to enable staff to know, understand and be able to meet the needs of each service user. A section entitled “Things You Need To Know About Me” clearly showed the individual service user’s likes, dislikes, preferences and choices in a number of activities of daily living. The actual care plan recorded strengths and needs with the aims (what is needed) and the objectives (how that will be achieved). Religious and cultural needs were noted. Care plans had been updated and signed approximately every six months. A daily record of the care given and any other significant events affecting the individual service user were now maintained. They were well detailed but written clearly and concisely giving an accurate reflection of the care given.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 A number of risk assessments were found on each file examined. These showed the risks associated with activities inside and outside the home. The assessments recorded the actions to be taken or the controls needed to minimise or eliminate any particular risk. There was no evidence to suggest service users were denied access to any activity because an element of risk was present. Although the care plans recorded each service user’s likes and dislikes, choices and preferences for the activities of daily living, the profound nature of each individual’s disabilities severely affected their ability to make day-to-day choices and decisions. Observation throughout the two site visit days showed staff’s attention to detail and understanding of each service user’s needs. Staff were seen and heard to consult with service users at every opportunity and nothing was done for that person without their involvement. Staff continually involved the service users in decisions about activities, food and drink and personal care. Staff appeared to understand the meaning of gestures, movements, facial expressions and changes in demeanour of the service users and to respond appropriately. Some small amounts of money were held for safe keeping on behalf of service users. The arrangements for receipt, recording and return of this money were satisfactory. None of the written responses received from relatives, visitors or visiting professionals raised any concerns about the care regime in operation at the home. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were able to undertake a number of activities in the home and at external locations that enhanced their life experiences. Service users were offered meals that met their likes and choices and catered for any special dietary needs. EVIDENCE: All service users suffered from a learning difficulty often with associated physical disabilities. None was able to undertake any form of employment. A number did attend day care placements that usually continued during their stay at the home (if accommodated during the week). Similarly staff made every effort to ensure service users could attend any regular evening social functions. A variety of activities were available in the home and at external locations. A number of those provided in-house were seen during both site visit days.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Often staff were involved with service users in one-to-one activities though occasionally those of a group nature were undertaken. Although the premises were rather isolated, regular excursions in the home’s minibus ensured service users were able to make full use of the wider community facilities and amenities. The staff rota was devised in such a way to ensure that a driver and escorts were always available. A number of service users said they enjoyed going out in the minibus. Visitors were welcomed though infrequent given the nature of the service offered by staff in the home. The registered provider had a published policy regarding visitors to the home. Routines, rules and regulations appeared to be few. Those in place were designed for the safety and overall welfare of the service user. The care plans showed each service user’s personal preferences and choices in terms of retiring and rising, personal care and freedom of movement. Service users were offered keys to their rooms and the reasons for acceptance or rejection were recorded on their care plan. Staff showed a good depth of knowledge about the many people in their care. Over 100 service users could be accommodated throughout the year. The purchase of clothing, toiletries, personal care products and hairdressing services were normally undertaken when service users were in their usual places of residence. However visits to local shops and supermarkets could result in purchases being made. The menus were devised by the staff based on the recorded likes, dislikes, preferences and choices of service users. Observation by staff of a service user’s reaction to additions to the menu gave a clear indication as to whether or not a particular item was liked. A variety of food was offered and the staff felt they catered for every need. Staff were observed to assist with breakfast and lunch and with drinks during the morning and afternoon. Any assistance was given in a quiet, dignified and unobtrusive way. Special crockery and cutlery was readily available. One relative commented that “decent meals were provided in the home but not in packed lunches when attending day centre.” Staff were aware of this concern and said they had been in discussion with this person and a satisfactory solution had been agreed and implemented. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 and 20. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users’ privacy and dignity was maintained through the attention to how personal and health care, including medication administration, were provided. EVIDENCE: The pre-admission documentation and the case file detailed the personal and health care needs and manner in which they were to be met. The accent was clearly on providing care that maintained each service user’s privacy, dignity and independence. All personal care was given behind closed doors. Observation clearly demonstrated that staff were diligent and alert to the signals, whether word, sound or movement, that suggested some care input was required. Not only were staff able to interpret these signs but they also responded quickly and appropriately. Health care needs were recorded but the majority of these would be addressed while the service users were living in their usual places of residence. A local general medical practice provided emergency cover if the service user’s own medical practitioner was unwilling or unable to visit. Records of medical interventions were noted on some of the files examined.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The necessary specialist equipment to ensure service users could use all the services and facilities provided by the home was in place. A medication policy and procedure were available. Discussion with and observation of staff carrying out medication administration and recording showed these procedures were being properly followed. All staff who administered and recorded medication had completed an external training course “The Safe Handling of Medicines.” None of the written responses received from relatives, visitors or visiting professionals raised any concerns about the way personal and health care was offered. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 and 23. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users and their representatives could have confidence their concerns and worries would be listened to and acted upon. EVIDENCE: A complaints leaflet detailed how to complain, to whom and gave timescales for any response. The name and address of the regulatory authority were shown. This information was also available in the Statement of Purpose, service User Guide and Service User contract. A complaints book was also examined. A revised copy of the multi agency agreement on adult protection was available together with a staff guide and information on computer disc to be used for individual and group training. Staff said training in adult protection issues was undertaken in the home, on LDAF (Learning Disability Awards Framework) and National Vocational Qualification assessments. They appeared knowledgeable and confident in the actions to be taken should abuse be suspected or alleged. No new complaints had been recorded since the last inspection. Two on-going at that time had been addressed. One had been resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. The second was the subject of further legal action and subsequently remained unresolved. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment
The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 and 30. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were provided with a homely and comfortable place in which to live. EVIDENCE: The site consists of two properties, Garfield Grange and Ashlyn. Garfield Grange the original building was opened over 10 years ago with the purpose built bungalow, Ashlyn, a later addition. The properties offer accommodation for a maximum of 12 service users all on respite or short term care. The site is rather isolated being over a mile from the nearest village and 6 miles from the centre of Hull. There is no public transport to the properties. There is no external indication that the properties form a care home. The premises are set in their own large secluded grounds. Level access is achieved to each external door. Fixtures, fittings, fabrics and furnishings were all domestic in nature reflecting the registered provider’s wish to create a non-institutional environment. The premises were maintained in a good condition both internally and externally.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 A maintenance person is employed and details are kept of the necessary repairs and renewals. The recommendations made in the last reports from the fire officer and the environmental health officer had been addressed and resolved. Specialist equipment was available as required including baths, hoists, beds and wheelchairs. A new wet floor shower had been installed in the upper floor bathroom of Garfield Grange. Bedrooms were all for single occupancy and furnished in a simple but adequate manner. Some had benefited from redecoration, new carpets and furniture. The provision in other rooms was older but deemed to be in a serviceable condition. Some bedrooms seen had a small measure of personalisation. Both properties were clean, tidy and odour free on the days of the site visits. Garfield Grange had a laundry area fitted with commercial machines. The walls and floors were readily cleansable. Suitable arrangements were in place for the laundering of linen, bedding, towels and, where necessary, personal clothing. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing
The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34 and 35. Quality in this outcome area was adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. While cared for by an able and well-motivated staff, evidence must be provided of the training given to ensure service users’ overall safety and wellbeing. EVIDENCE: The numbers and skill mix of the staff group met service users’ needs. Male and female staff were employed of different ages and backgrounds. The staff rota was seen and discussed with senior staff on duty. It was stated that staffing levels were maintained in accordance with those detailed on the rota. As the rota was completed only a week or two in advance, staffing levels could be adjusted according to the number of service users to be admitted and their assessed needs. Bank staff were used, all employed by the Registered Provider. Senior staff said the bank staff knew the home and the service users. They were confident consistency of care was maintained. Staff said they enjoyed their work, had time to address service users’ needs, often working on a one-to-one basis and felt the standard of service given was very good. Staff appeared clear about their role and what was expected of them.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 They showed an understanding of the actions needed to meet and promote equality and diversity. The Regulation 26 reports completed by a representative of the Registered Provider regularly noted the good standard of service provided in the home to service users. Of the 12 permanent staff and 6 bank staff currently employed, 5 had achieved a National Vocational Qualification in care to level 2. The Registered Provider was aware of the need for at least 50 of their staff to have achieved this award. Some staff with the award to level 2 were keen to progress to further higher qualifications. The Registered Provider should try to ensure staff have the opportunity to achieve this ambition. All recruitment and selection of staff for the home was done through the published procedures of the Registered Provider. A number of staff files were examined including those of the last two permanent staff to be employed. They contained an application form, two references and the necessary clearances required prior to employment, for example enhanced disclosures from the Criminal Records Bureau. There was an in-house induction programme complemented by attendance on LDAF courses (Learning Disability Award Framework) and National Vocational Qualifications awards. A training plan had been developed to ensure training was provided to staff throughout the year. This training would include specialist subjects such as autism, as well as the mandatory training to meet service users basic needs, such as manual handling and health and safety. There was however a measure of uncertainty among staff as to if and when original or updated training in these matters had been given. The home’s training matrix showed the need for course attendance for many of the staff. The Registered Provider must provide evidence that initial and updated training is being given. Responses on comment cards described staff as “helpful and caring.” One visitor said “Staff are very good and very caring. They seem to know what my relative wants and when. I can’t fault them.” Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Conduct and Management of the Home
The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 and 42. Quality in this outcome area was good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users lived in a well-managed and safe environment. EVIDENCE: There was no Registered Manager in place. The Acting Manager provided care and some management leadership. Current regulations require a Registered Manager to be appointed. This matter is under discussion between the Registered Provider and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. A service review took place annually with the next one due in August this year. This involved service users, families and other interested parties in the process of reviewing the service performance. A development plan would be produced that was seen as crucial to the service development in line with the Registered Provider’s principles of continuous improvement. It was stated that the outcome would be published in October to allow the necessary resources to be linked to budget setting.
Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Proper attention was being given to matters of health and safety. A number of safety reports and certificates were examined. All were relevant and up-todate apart from the need to provide a safety certificate for the electrical installation and supply. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES
This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from:
4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable
CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 3 2 3 3 x 4 x 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 x 26 x 27 x 28 x 29 x 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 x 32 2 33 34 35 36 3 3 x 3 x LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 3 3 3 x 3 3 3 x 3 2 x CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Score PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21
Garfield Grange Score 3 3 3 x 3 x 3 x x 2 x
Version 5.2 Page 24 NO. Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA35 Regulation 18(a)&(c) Requirement The registered person must provide evidence that staff have received the required training updates. The home must have a Registered Manager. The registered person must provide evidence that the electrical supply and installation are safe. Timescale for action 30/09/06 2. 3. YA37 YA42 8(1) 13(4) 30/09/06 31/08/06 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. 2. Refer to Standard YA32 YA32 Good Practice Recommendations The registered person should ensure at least 50 of the care staff have achieved a National Vocational Qualification in care to at least level 2. The registered person should ensure staff have the opportunity to achieve higher National Vocational Qualifications if they so wish. Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection York Area Office Unit 4 Triune Court Monks Cross York YO32 9GZ National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 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 Garfield Grange DS0000019672.V303670.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!
