Inspection on 01/09/05 for Israel Sieff Court

This inspection was carried out on 1st September 2005.

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 found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Israel Sieff Court 09/07/09

Israel Sieff Court 21/08/07

Israel Sieff Court 12/02/07

Israel Sieff Court 28/02/06

Israel Sieff Court 11/03/05

Israel Sieff Court 11/11/04

Israel Sieff Court 16/03/04

Israel Sieff Court 14/10/03

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 Israel Sieff Court 7A Bennett Road Crumpsall Manchester M8 8DU Lead Inspector Ann Connolly Unannounced 1 September 2005 10.00am st 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 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. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Israel Sieff Court Address 7A Bennett Road Crumpsall Manchester M8 8DU 0161 740 8597 Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Anchor Trust Responsible Individual - Jane Rachel Ashcroft Sharon Bollesty Care home only 34 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (OP) (34) of places Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: No conditions apply Date of last inspection 11 March 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Israel Sieff is a purpose built care home that provides accommodation and personel care for 34 elderly residents. It is one of a number of homes owned by Anchor Homes, which form part of Anchor Trust, a registered charity. The property has three floors, and bedrooms are located on each of the floors. All the accommodation is offered in single rooms which provide en-suite facilities. The home is situated in a residential street in the Crumpsall area of Manchester, about three miles from the city centre. The Crumpsall Metro Station and public transport links are all within easy walking distance. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was unannounced and took place over 4 hours on the 2 September 2005. During the inspection, time was spent talking to a number of residents who live in the home, the manager, senior staff, members of staff, and visitors to find out their views of the service. Time was spent examining medication, the care plan files, health and safety issues and meals. A tour of the building also took place. During this inspection only a selection of the National Minimum Standards were assessed. In order to gain a full picture of how the home meets the needs of the residents, this report should be read together with the previous and any future reports. What the service does well: This home continues to work towards improving and developing systems and services within the home, and places residents at the centre of all decision making. Residents are consulted on all aspects of the service and one resident said that they had recently had new dining room furniture in the home. She said that the manager had organised samples of the furniture to be delivered to enable residents to give their opinion on the comfort, styles and colour etc. The staff team work well together and are motivated about training and development. Staff are actively encouraged to support new staff and contribute to their induction programme. Care plans have been developed using a person centred approach which provides a structure for involving residents and their families in the planning of care to meet residents individual care needs. The manager and staff team benefit from good administrative support. All staff spoke highly about the support received from the manager, “We can approach the manager with any concerns, and she turns a negative into a positive.” Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 6 All residents spoken to spoke highly of the manager and staff team and expressed confidence in the way in which care was provided. One resident said,’ Staff are very good, they are really helpful’. Another resident said, ‘ I know I can go to the staff or the manager with any concerns that I have’. Residents seemed content and relaxed in their surroundings, one person said’ I knew this was a good place as soon as I walked through the door’. There were high standards of hygiene and cleanliness throughout all parts of the home. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Resident finances were held in one account and did not meet the National Minimum Standards to ensure that resident’s monies must be held in the name of the resident to whom the money belongs. Systems must be put in place to safeguard residents finances. All monies belonging to residents must be put in an interest bearing account in the name of the person to whom the money belongs. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 7 During this inspection medication was not signed for in line with good policies and procedures. Medication must be signed for immediately following administration. 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. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1 and 3 Residents are provided with information about the home to help them to make an informed choice about their care arrangements. An assessment of care needs is carried out prior to arranging the admission of a prospective resident into the home. EVIDENCE: The home had a Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide, which included useful information about the range of services available in the home, and provided details of staffing arrangements. All existing and prospective residents were provided with sufficient information to help them to make an informed choice about their future care needs. The Guide was made available to all visitors to the home and was located in the entrance hall. The Guide also contained the latest copy of the inspection report enabling people who use the service to see how well the home was performing in terms of meeting the National Minimum Standards and whether the home was meeting the needs of the residents. The manager said that the Guides were scheduled for review and updating. A new template has been developed which enables each Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 10 individual home within the Anchor group to personalise the Guides and make them service specific to reflect the individual home. A number of care files were examined, and all contained in depth preadmission assessments of care needs. Files included the multidisciplinary assessments undertaken by the health professionals and social workers, and this was supplemented with an assessment carried out by the manager or representative of the home, in which an individual’s care needs would be assessed to determine if the home was able to meet specific care needs. Following the admission of an individual resident, the information in the preadmission documentation was used to develop the care plan, and provide staff with all the appropriate information required to meet specific care needs. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7 and 9 The needs of individual residents was set out in a plan of care detailing the support, care and interventions required to meet need. Some shortfalls were evident in the handling of medication that could potentially place residents at risk. EVIDENCE: All residents in the home had a care plan in the form of ‘an individual lifestyle agreement’. This document had been compiled using the information in the pre-admission assessment. The care plans were worded in the first person to reflect the involvement of the resident in drawing up and developing the care plan. The content of the care plan and the way in which they were written provided evidence of a system that placed considerable emphasis on developing the care plan with the resident so that their perception of their care needs were carefully listened to and included in the care plan. The Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 12 interventions focused on how the individual resident wanted to have his/her care needs met. The care plans were presented in well-organised files, which were linked to the daily progress notes. Staff were observed using the care plans as a working document to help them in providing care to the individual resident. The care plans included nutritional assessments and risk assessments. Care plans were regularly reviewed and all documentation was updated to reflect any changes in current care needs. Two members of staff have been designated as ‘in house’ review co-ordinators. Their responsibilities include liaising with the staff team to ensure that all care plans are reviewed monthly, and to develop the care plan files further into a ‘user friendly’ document for staff to use on a daily basis. Medication was administered using the ‘Venalink’ bubble pack monitored dosage system. Staff responsible for the administration of medication were listed in the medication records. The medication trolley was well organised and all medication was stored and labelled appropriately. During the inspection one member of staff was observed in the administration of medication. On this occasion medication was signed for prior to administration instead of immediately afterwards. The manager acknowledged this shortfall and said that refresher training would be provided to staff. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13 and 15 Residents were regularly consulted about their interests, and the plans of care reflected the individual needs. Residents in the home were encouraged to maintain contact with family and friends. Varied and wholesome and well balanced meals were available to residents in the home which offered choices on a daily basis. EVIDENCE: The care plans included details of resident’s interest and social preferences. One resident said, ‘ There is always something going on here like bingo or arts and crafts’.The home employed a person to provide craft activities twice a week. The home has an open visiting policy and all information about visiting arrangements was included in the statement of purpose and service user guide. At the time of the inspection visitors were seen to come and go and appeared relaxed and ‘at home’. All visitors who were spoken to said that staff always made visitors welcome. One relative said that she visited regularly and at various times but was always made to feel welcome. A resident spoke Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 14 highly of visiting arrangements, he said, “My wife comes two or three times a week and she is really made welcome by the staff”. Meals were served in a pleasant and comfortable dining room. Tables were set in small intimate groups to accommodate four people, and care and attention was taken to set the tables tastefully with placemats, serviettes and flower arrangements. A choice of meals was offered. The main meal at the time of inspection consisted of fish chips and peas or the alternative of sausage chips and peas. A choice of three deserts was available . Meals were well presented, and the whole occasion was relaxed and informal. There were sufficient staff on duty to serve meals and offer one to one support to residents when this was required. Staff were seen to communicate well with residents offering help in a sensitive and caring manner. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 15 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 The home has policies and procedures in place to enable concerns to be raised. EVIDENCE: The home had a comprehensive complaints procedure which included the name and address of the Commission for Social Care Inspection and provided clear guidance on how to make a complaint. A copy of the complaints procedure was located on the main notice board informing residents and visitors to the home that the Commission for Social Care Inspection could be contacted at any stage in the complaints procedure. Residents spoken to said they felt confident in approaching the manager and staff with any issues of concerns, this was also expressed by relatives visiting the home. The home had a clear method of recording and investigating complaints which included full details of the complaint, details of the investigation, any action taken as a result of the findings and the outcome. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19 and 26 The environment was tidy, clean and comfortable with systems in place to protect the safety of residents. EVIDENCE: Israel Sieff provides a ‘homely’ environment within a purpose built building. Furniture was domestic in character, and there was evidence of ongoing maintenance and refurbishment to maintain high standards in the home. New dining room furniture had been purchased since the last inspection. Individual bedrooms were furnished and equipped to a good standard and most had been personalised by residents. All bedrooms had been fitted with a safe and a lockable medicine cupboard to promote privacy and independence for residents wishing to use these facilities. There was adequate communal space throughout the home. The large ground floor communal lounge was sited near to the dining room and two further lounges on the upper floor provided a designated smoking area and a craft room. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 All areas of the building were clean and tidy and there was a high standard of hygiene throughout the building. Systems, policies and procedures were in place to control the spread of infection and ensure the health and safety of residents and staff. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 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 considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27 and 28 Staffing arrangements were sufficient to meet the needs of residents in the home. EVIDENCE: At the time of inspection there were four care staff, a senior staff, the manager, two kitchen staff and two domestics on duty. Two additional staff were on duty to provide induction training to two new members of staff. All residents spoken to expressed satisfaction about the way in which the staff met their care needs. One resident said ,”I like everything about it here, the staff are wonderful and always helpful”. Observations of staff working with residents provided evidence of appropriate and sensitive interventions. Staff spoke to residents showing courtesy and respect and it was evident that there was a good rapport between them. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31,33, 35 and 36 Residents benefited from living in a home that had good managerial leadership. Staff were in receipt of formal and informal supervision designed to promote personal development and to enable staff to develop the skills required to meet the needs of residents in the home. Systems to safeguard residents financial interest were inadequate and required improvement. EVIDENCE: The manager had 13 years experience of working in a setting providing care for older people. The manager had a range of qualifications, which provided evidence of a commitment to ongoing training and personal development. Residents spoken to spoke highly of the staff and the manager and most said they felt they felt confident in approaching the manager with any issues of Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 concern. The home organised regular formal and informal consultations with residents to seek their views on how the home should be run. Staff in the home spoke highly of the ‘open’ management style and said they felt very supported by the manager. One member of staff said,”You know the support is always there from the manager. We can approach her with any concerns and usually a concern or problem is turned into a positive”. It was evident from discussions with the manager that it was the policy of the home to encourage residents to handle their own affairs and finances for as long as possible. Most residents negotiated with their families to manage personal allowances and only small amounts of money were held by the home. The home had one bank account named ‘service user accounts’. The saving of a number of residents was held in this account. This arrangement does not comply with Regulation 20 where it states that the registered person shall not pay money belonging to the service user into an account unless it is in the name of the service user to which the money belongs. The manager said that Anchor Head Office was addressing this issue and were currently developing a scheme which will ensure compliance with Regulations, and were piloting a scheme in one of the homes within the Anchor group. There was also evidence that the manager was committed to meeting this requirement and she had approached Age Concern Advocacy Services for one individual resident to assist with arrangements to safeguard his financial interests. The requirement from the previous inspection report to ensure systems are in place to safeguard residents fiancés is repeated in this report. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 x 3 x x x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 x 9 2 10 x 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 x 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 3 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 x 30 x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x x 3 x 3 x 2 3 x x Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 22 yes 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 9 Regulation 13 Requirement All staff must follow policies and procedures for the safe handling and administration of medication. The registered manager must ensure that money belonging to residents is held in an account in the name of the resident or any of the residents to which the money belongs (Previous timescale not met 1/5/05) Timescale for action 2/9/05 2. 35 20 12/12/05 3. 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 Good Practice Recommendations No recommendations have been made as a result of this inspection. Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection 9th Floor, Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ 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 Israel Sieff Court F05 F55 s21553 Israel Sieff V247277 D010905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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!