Inspection on 14/12/07 for Hill View Care Centre

This inspection was carried out on 14th December 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

Hill View Care Centre 24/10/06

Hill View Care Centre 22/11/05

Hill View Care Centre 28/06/05

Hill View Care Centre 01/02/05

Hill View Care Centre 31/08/04

Hill View Care Centre 10/03/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 09/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Hill View Care Centre Crankshaw Street Rawtenstall Rossendale Lancashire BB4 7RA Lead Inspector Mrs Janet Proctor Unannounced Inspection 14th December 2007 09:30 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 Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.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. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Hill View Care Centre Address Crankshaw Street Rawtenstall Rossendale Lancashire BB4 7RA 01706 218484 01706 211321 hillviewcc@schealthcare.co.uk 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) Southern Cross Care Homes Limited Miss Emma Malecki Care Home 45 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (2), Mental registration, with number Disorder, excluding learning disability or of places dementia - over 65 years of age (2), Old age, not falling within any other category (45), Physical disability (2), Physical disability over 65 years of age (25) Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. maximum of 45 service users requiring personal care who fall into the category of OP. Within the overall total of 45, a maximum of 25 service users requiring personal care who fall into the category of PD(E). Within the overall total ogf 45, a maximum of 20 service users requiring nursing care who fall into the category of OP. Within the overall total of 45, a maximum of 2 service users requiring nursing care who fall into the category of DE(E) or MD(E) Within the overall total of 45, 2 named service user srequiring personal care who falls into the category of PD. The service should employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission 24th October 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Hill View was purpose built in 1990. It is a two-storey building with car parking available to the front of the building. There is wheelchair access via a ramp. The home is situated close to the town centre of Rawtenstall. Local amenities, including the market place, are near by. The registered persons for Hill View are Southern Cross Care Homes Ltd, who are a company providing care throughout the UK. The day to day management of the home is undertaken by a Manager. Hill View provides both nursing and personal care for men and women over the age of 65 years. Accommodation is provided on 2 levels and a passenger lift enables access to the first floor. All accommodation is provided in single rooms. There is an enclosed garden where service users may sit when the weather permits. Hill View is part of a larger company providing care throughout the UK. Information on the home is available in the Service User’s Guide and previous reports. These are displayed in the reception area of the home and copies can be supplied. In December 2007 the fees for the home were £374-00 to £47500 per week depending on the type of care required. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. A key unannounced inspection, which included a visit to the home, was conducted at Hill View Care Centre on the 14thDecember 2007. No additional visits had been made since the previous inspection. On the day of the inspection there were 37 residents at the home. Eleven of these were in need of nursing care and 26 in need of personal care. Prior to the inspection the Manager completed an Annual Quality Assurance Assessment. The form had been very well completed and gave a lot of useful information that was used in the planning of the inspection. At the time of the inspection information was obtained from staff records, care records, and policies and procedures. Information was also got from talking to residents, the Manager, staff members and a visitor. A tour of the building also took place. Two survey questionnaires were returned from relatives/visitors and two from residents. Five staff members also returned surveys. Wherever possible the views of residents were obtained about their life at the home and these are included in the report. What the service does well: The service ensured that a thorough assessment was undertaken before a prospective resident was admitted to the home. This meant that their needs were known and arrangements could be made to ensure that these were met. There was a plan of care for each resident so that the staff knew what their needs were and how to meet these. One of the staff surveys returned said, “The care plans are informative and written in a way that everyone can understand.” Residents were cared for in a friendly and professional manner. They said, “I’m happy living at Hill View” and “It’s just like a big hotel”. The resident surveys returned said that they received the care and support and medical support that they needed. The medications were kept and given in a safe manner. This protected the health and welfare of residents. Residents were able to take part in a wide range of regular activities. This meant that their social and recreational needs were met. Residents said, “I like the activities” and “It gets us all going and stops us being bored.” The resident surveys returned said that there were always activities available for them to Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 take part in. The relative surveys returned said that they were pleased with the activities on offer. The home provided a clean and pleasant place for residents to live. Residents said, “My bedroom’s grand, I wouldn’t swap it” and “My bedroom’s nice and large and got everything I need in it.” The resident surveys returned said that the home was always fresh and clean. All new staff had a thorough pre-employment check. This ensured that residents were safeguarded. Once employed they received an Induction and training to ensure that they had the skills and knowledge to care for residents. The home was well managed. Audits were done. This gave the Manager the chance to be aware of areas that might not be running as well as they should. She could then do an action plan to ensure that these were put right. What has improved since the last inspection? The adverse effects of anti-coagulant therapy had been included in the plan of care so that staff were aware of what the signs and symptoms of this were. Any handwritten entries to the Medication Administration Recording charts had been signed and witnessed. This ensured that the details had been written correctly. The temperature of the medication storage room had not risen above 25 degrees Celsius so that the medications were stored correctly. New menus had been introduced following comments received from residents and relatives. Residents said, “The food’s very good, I’m putting on weight if that’s any proof” and “The food’s very nice. I enjoy my meals.” The resident surveys returned said that they always liked the meals at the home. The cleaning record in the kitchen had been signed by the person completing the task. This meant that it could be seen who had done the task. A new lift was being fitted so that residents could be moved between the ground and first floor in a safe manner. Areas of the home had been redecorated and new flooring fitted. This ensured that all areas of the home remained clean, tasteful and pleasant to live in. Steradent was not on display in residents’ bedrooms so that residents who were confused could not access potentially harmful items. The Induction books for new staff were signed when they had been completed so that there was verification that they were competent to do the tasks. The number of staff with the National Vocational Qualification in care had increased to 80 . This meant that the majority of the care staff had the skills and knowledge to understand their role and work. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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): 3 and 6. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. All prospective residents received a thorough assessment so that their needs were known and arrangements could be made to ensure that these were met. EVIDENCE: The files for three residents were viewed. These contained evidence that the resident had had their needs assessed before coming to live at Hill View. Some files also had assessments and information from other professionals involved in their care. When the assessment had been completed the manager had written to them telling them that their needs could be met at the home. This meant they could be confident that they would get the right care. Residents spoken to said that they were happy living at Hill View. Intermediate care was not done at Hill View Care Centre. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.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 and 19. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Staff were provided with the information they needed to satisfactorily meet residents’ personal and health care needs. Medication practices were safe. Residents felt they were treated with respect. EVIDENCE: A plan of care was prepared as soon as the resident was admitted. The plans of care included good directions to staff on how to meet the individual needs of each resident. They told staff exactly what it was they had to do for the resident. The plans were reviewed monthly. The majority of the reviews seen made a statement to show what progress was being made towards meeting the needs of the resident. For those plans that did not have a progress statement, it meant that it could not be seen that the care being given was right for the resident or not. Relatives were invited to a review meeting so that they had the opportunity to be fully involved in the care planning process. A review sheet was completed that showed any concerns, queries or agreements reached. The relative Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 surveys returned said that they were kept up to date with important issues affecting their relative. Assessments to ensure that residents’ health care needs were identified were done. These included: risk of developing pressure sores; nutrition; risk of falls; risk of using bed-side rails; moving and handling needs; and continence needs. There was equipment for relieving pressure and preventing sores when a resident was ‘at risk’ of developing these. Any wound was correctly documented and the progress monitored. There was evidence that other professionals were called to see the resident when required. These included: GPs; District Nurses; chiropodists, opticians; Tissue Viability Nurse; and dietician. A resident made comment about being disturbed in the night by another resident who was wandering. Thought should be given to the use of aids e.g. a pressure mat by the side of the bed so that staff know when she is out of bed. The control of medications within the home was very good. There were records to show what had been ordered, received, administered and disposed of. The prescriptions were seen before being dispensed. Any medications ordered mid month were properly recorded. There were directions for staff if any ‘as required’ medication was needed by a resident. This ensured that they received this in a consistent manner. The Clean Utility Room was clean and tidy and there was no over stocking of medication or dressings. Medication was stored correctly and records were kept of the fridge and room temperatures. There was an appropriate Controlled Drug cupboard and recording book. The Controlled Drugs were checked and matched the balance in the register. The need for privacy when giving personal care was noted in plan of care. The preferred term of address was noted in plan of care. Staff were seen to approach residents in a pleasant and caring manner. There was provision for religious needs to be met. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.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 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ recreational and social needs were being met. Contact with relatives and friends was encouraged and they were made welcome at the home. Residents received a varied and nutritious diet and said that they enjoyed the food. EVIDENCE: The plans of care included details about the resident’s past interests and hobbies. A social care profile had also been completed that gave information about the resident’s past life. There was an Activities Co-ordinator who took responsibility for planning and implementing activities. There was a programme on display that covered a wide range of activities that were done in the morning and the afternoon. There was a wildlife garden and a pet rabbit for residents’ enjoyment. Records were kept of what activities had been done and who had joined in so that it could be seen that social and recreational needs were being met. There were no restrictions on visiting. Visitors were seen to be offered refreshments on the day of the inspection. One relatives survey returned said that they did not get offered a cup of tea when they visited. A visitor spoken to Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 at the time of the inspection said, “The staff are always friendly and welcoming when we come”. The relative surveys returned said that their relative was usually helped to keep in contact with them. Residents said they could make choices about what they did and when. They could use either of the lounges or stay in their bedroom if they wished to. They could go to bed and get up at a time that suited them. A resident said, “I can get up and go to bed when I want.” One of the staff surveys returned said, “We are encouraged to treat everyone as individuals.” A new menu system had been introduced. This was based on a nutritionally sound schedule of meals. The menus were on display in the dining room and showed the nutritional component of the meal. The likes and dislikes of the residents were known and respected and alternatives to the menu could be requested. Residents were asked the day before what they wanted from the menu. The night staff had access to snack type foods so that they could prepare something if a resident was hungry during the night. Residents spoken to were happy with the meals at the home. The tables were nicely set out with flowers, place mats, and table cloths. There was a peaceful atmosphere at the meal time. Staff were feeding residents in an appropriate manner. Records were kept of the meals served and if anyone had an alternative to the menu. Records were kept of fridge, freezer and cooking temperatures. There was a cleaning schedule. Sufficient food and fresh fruit, vegetables and salad were seen in stock. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.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 and 18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents were confident that their concerns would be listened to and acted upon. The procedures and training for staff meant that residents were safeguarded. EVIDENCE: There was a procedure on display that told people what to do if they wished to make a complaint. It gave the time scales for a response and the contact details of the Commission. There was a system for recording complaints. An investigation would be done and then the person making the complaint would be sent a report of what was found and any action to be taken. One complaint received at the home and had been responded to appropriately. No complaints had been made to the Commission. The resident surveys returned said that they knew how to make a complaint and who to speak to if they were not happy. The relative surveys said that they knew how to make a complaint. One commented, “When mum went in the care home I was given an information pack. The pack covered how to make a complaint” There were procedures for safeguarding the residents. These told staff what to do if they saw, heard or suspected anything was not right. There was a Whistle Blowing procedure on display. Staff received a copy of this in the Staff Handbook at the beginning of their employment. Staff could also use a confidential hotline to report any concerns. There was training for staff in Protection of Vulnerable Adults and staff spoken to were aware of what to do. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents lived in a pleasant, safe and well-maintained environment. EVIDENCE: All areas of the home were clean, nicely decorated and well maintained. There were Handymen on site to do repairs and decorating. The decoration throughout the home was very tasteful and the use of ornaments, pictures, and flower arrangements gave a homely atmosphere. There was a smoking area for residents. Since the last visit the reception area and ground floor lounge/dining room had new flooring fitted. A new carpet had been fitted in the first floor lounge. A new lift was being fitted on the day of the inspection. Bedrooms looked very pleasant as they were nicely decorated and had matching quilt covers and curtains. They had locks on the door and each resident had a lockable storage space. This protected their privacy. Residents could bring in items of their own furniture if they wished to. Safety of Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 residents was protected by the use of radiator guards, window restrictors and access to a staff call system in all areas. The temperature of the first floor lounge felt a little cool. It was actually 70 degrees Celsius but the residents were all ‘wrapped up’ in blankets and fleeces and the staff were all wearing cardigans. The Manager said that the second boiler was not working to full capacity and was due for repair next week. Discussion took place on using additional heating measures in the meantime. Liquid soap and paper towels were available in each room to encourage good hand washing practice. There were two washers with a sluice programme in the laundry. There was one dryer. There was a sink with liquid soap and paper towels. There were gloves available for handling laundry. Red alginate bags were used for fouled linen. This protected the control of infection within the laundry. There were separate sluice facilities on each floor. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ needs were met by the numbers of staff on duty. The recruitment procedures were thorough and safeguarded residents. Staff had received training to ensure that they were competent to do their jobs. EVIDENCE: There was a duty rota showing the names and grades of staff and what hours they worked. The number of staff rostered for duty was sufficient for the number of residents living at the home. The Manager was supernumerary to the staff numbers. There was a stable staff team with a very small turnover and little incident of sickness or absenteeism. The resident surveys returned said that there usually staff available when they needed them. The staff surveys returned said that there were usually enough staff to meet residents’ needs and one commented, “We rarely work short staffed”. One of the relative surveys returned said that they would like to see more staff at busier times. There was an Administrator employed. There were sufficient ancillary staff to ensure that the cleaning, cooking and laundry was done each day. There were evening cleaners and kitchen staff employed so that care staff could concentrate on delivering care to residents. There was also a Handyman and a decorator employed. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Three staff files were viewed. These showed that new employees had completed an application form and had a face-to-face interview. A Criminal Records Bureau clearance was done and completed prior to employment. Two references were requested and received and one of these was from the previous employer. There was proof of the employee’s identity, including a recent photograph. All new staff received a copy of the Staff Handbook and the GSCC code of conduct and practice. Staff received a contract of employment. All new employees received a First Day Induction, which included fire safety and health and safety issues. A record of this was kept in the staff file. They then completed an Induction workbook that included a review and assessment section. They were allocated a mentor who ‘signed off’ the Induction programme when the new member of staff was proficient at the task. There was a rolling programme of training to ensure that staff received all their mandatory training. There was a matrix to show which staff had done what training and when. The staff surveys returned confirmed that the staff had received training that was relevant to their role, helped them understand individual needs and kept them up to date with new ways of working. 80 of the carers had the National Vocational Qualification in care level 2. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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, 33, 35 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was very well managed and residents and staff had confidence in the Manager’s abilities. Residents were able to give their views on how the home was run and these were acted upon. Resident’s financial interests were safeguarded. The health, safety and welfare of staff was fully promoted and protected. EVIDENCE: The Registered Manager is a Registered Nurse with a BA in Nursing. She has experience in managing homes. She is now doing the NVQ 4 and has done all of the mandatory training. She is supported by an Operations Manager. There were clear lines of accountability in the organisation. Residents and staff spoken to said that they had every confidence in the Deputy and the manager. A staff member said, “They always try and resolve things. We have meetings Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 where you can say what you think about things.” Staff surveys returned commented, “Our manager is very approachable” and “I feel valued and respected in my job role”. A number of audits were done to ensure that the home was running smoothly and was at the expected standard. One month this was done by the home manager and the next month by the operations manager. This meant that it was not just one person’s opinion of whether things were running smoothly. The Operations Manager made regular visits and issued a report on her findings. This meant that staff and residents had an opportunity to make their views known to someone outside the home’s management. A survey of residents’ views had been done and the results shown in a graph form. There was evidence of action from these results. For example, the menus had been changed as a result of comments received. Residents and relatives meetings were held occasionally, the next one being due in January 2008. These were made into a social occasion with a buffet tea. Staff meetings were held. The issues discussed were recorded and minutes produced. These meetings enabled residents, relatives and staff to give their opinion on how the home was run. A staff survey returned said, “Regular staff meetings are offered.” A new system for managing residents’ finances was being introduced. All residents’ money, including their personal allowance due to them, would now be kept in a residents’ bank account. The Manager and Administrator had access to the record of the individual amounts that residents had in the bank so that they knew how much the resident had and could spend. The manager had a small float or could issue cheques, which would then be debited to the resident’s money. There were safe keeping facilities for any valuables or money left with staff and receipts were given. Fire drills were done on a regular basis and the staff that attended were named. The fire alarms were tested weekly. The extinguishers and alarm system were serviced. Portable Appliance Testing had been done. All other appliances had been serviced as required and there were certificates to demonstrate this. Updates for staff in safe working practices was being done. There were regular Health & Safety meetings to ensure that issues were identified and addressed. Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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 X X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 4 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 4 X 3 X X 3 Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 OP7 Good Practice Recommendations When the care plan is reviewed there should be a statement to show what progress has been since the last review. This is so that it can be seen whether the care actions taken by staff are right for the resident. Thought should be given to the use of aids e.g. a pressure mat by the side of the bed, to alert staff that a resident is wandering at night. 2 OP7 Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Lancashire Area Office Unit 1 Tustin Court Portway Preston PR2 2YQ 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 Hill View Care Centre DS0000022484.V353551.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 - 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!