Inspection on 12/06/08 for Jack Simpson House

This inspection was carried out on 12th June 2008.

CSCI found this care home to be providing an Good service.

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

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 28/09/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Jack Simpson House North Street Heavitree Exeter Devon EX1 2RH Lead Inspector Louise Delacroix Unannounced Inspection 12th June 2008 09:00 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 Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.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. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Jack Simpson House Address North Street Heavitree Exeter Devon EX1 2RH 01392 686486 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) Jack.Simpsonhouse@Guinness.org.uk Guinness Care and Support Ltd Mr Trevor John Lewis Care Home 35 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (35), Physical disability (35) of places Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The registered person may provide the following category of service only: Care home only - Code PC to service users of either gender whose primary care needs on admission to the home are within the following categories: Old age, not falling within any other category (Code OP) Physical disability - (Code PD) The maximum number of service users who can be accommodated is 35. 28th November 2007 2. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Jack Simpson House provides accommodation and personal care for thirty-five men and women who are over retirement age and who may have a significant mobility difficulty. The home is very close to the shops and facilities of Heavitree. An automatically opening front door, ramps and a shaft lift to each floor enable service users to maximise their independence. Many bedrooms are large, and have a small kitchenette area with twenty-five rooms with an en suite bathroom. On the ground floor, there is a large dining room with a sitting area overlooking a courtyard garden, a lounge and a small smoking room. The last Commission for Social Care Inspection report is clearly displayed on a residents’ information notice board. The fees range from £277 -£495. Additional charges are made for private chiropody, hairdressing, toiletries, private telephone, transport for health appointments, trips out and newspapers/magazines. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 2 star. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes. The inspection was unannounced and took place over seven hours and twentyfive minutes. On the day of the inspection, thirty-four people were living at the home with one person in hospital. Prior to the inspection, the home completed an Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA), which provides the commission (CSCI) with current information about the service, staff and people living at the home. As part of the inspection, three people were case tracked, this means that the records linked to their care and stay were inspected and where possible they were spoken to. During the inspection, a tour of the building took place and records including care plans, staff recruitment, training and medication were looked at. We were accompanied by an Expert by Experience from Help the Aged who spent time talking with people living at the home, and their views on the care they receive have been incorporated into this report. Prior to the inspection, CSCI also sent surveys to people living at the home, relatives and health professionals. After looking through people’s responses and talking to a relative, it became clear that unfortunately they had been wrongly distributed by the home so that some people had been given the wrong survey. Where possible we have included comments from these surveys. GPs who have patients at the home also completed surveys about the care provided, which are referred to in the report. Since the last inspection, the acting manager Trevor Lewis has had his application to be registered manager approved by CSCI. As part of the inspection, discussion took place with the registered manager and with staff. We also spoke with visitors and visiting health professionals. These discussions are contained in this report. What the service does well: The home encourages people to visit the home before moving in. As part of this process, prospective residents are met either in their own homes, hospital or at Jack Simpson House to ensure that the home can meet their care needs. The ethos of the home ensures that people feel respected, listened to and are offered choice. People were positive about their relationship with staff and the quality of the meals. They told us ‘all good, I’m very happy’, ‘the staff are Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 kind’ and ‘very happy here, always have been’. The home maintains good links with social and health care professionals. People are generally positive about the activities offered, while the quality of the meals have been praised and the atmosphere of the home encourages visitors. People are clear about who to go to if they have a concern or complaint, and are confident that they will be addressed. The majority of the home is well-maintained. Mandatory staff training is promoted, and kept up to date. Staff are clear about their duties and responsibilities. The home is well-managed, with an experienced and skilled team of carers, and is set up with the aim to involve people in making decisions about the home’s running i.e. through residents’ meetings. Records are well maintained and safety checks are up to date. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We inspected standard 3. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Prospective residents have the information to make a decision about whether they move to the home based on visits and the assessment process. EVIDENCE: In the home’s AQAA, the manager told us that people are encouraged to visit the home so that they can meet the people living and working there. This can also include lunch and joining in with an activity to help them gain a picture of the life of the home. He confirmed this was also a time to discuss the needs of people and whether they are able to meet their care requirements. In the home’s AQAA the manager explains, ‘ it is important for prospective residents to make a decision to move in based on their understanding of what they can expect residential life to be before they move in to ensure they feel they have made the right choice and their independence and choice will be supported.’ Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 The manager said the home’s pre-admission practice had improved by encouraging people to stay for the day rather than just looking around and gave an example of when this had happened. Looking at pre-admission assessments, we could see evidence of the above good practice and that the manager took a holistic approach covering social, physical and mental health needs, as well as incorporating the prospective person’s views and the views of others involved in their lives and care. Five people told us in their surveys that they had received enough information about the home before they moved in so they could decide if it was the right place for them. The manager recognises the importance of providing as much information as possible to prospective residents and their families, and is developing systems to evidence good practice. He also hopes that in the future the brochure for the home will have more photos of the home and more information. The home does not provide intermediate care. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.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): We looked at standards 7,8,9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There has been a significant improvement in the care plan, providing clear guidance to staff to ensure that people’s individual needs are met. Medication administration is well managed, and the home maintains good contacts with health and social care professionals to the benefit of people living at the home, whose health and personal care needs are well met. The ethos of the home promotes the dignity and privacy of the people living there. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection, the manager and staff have worked hard to make the care plans reflect the individual needs of people living at the home and provide clear guidance to staff. We looked at three care plans and saw that they had Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 monthly reviews which were holistic in their style i.e. reviewing all aspects of the person’s life. The care plans identify areas of risk and provide guidance to staff as to how they should support the person. We could see that where health concerns had been identified i.e. weight loss, and that advice had been sought and food/fluid intake was being monitored with the person weighed regularly. Staff confirmed this to be the case. The care plans promote choice and people’s independence i.e. choosing clothes and maintaining self-esteem. There was also recognition of people’s faith and how they wished to be supported with this. Care plans also recognise the diversity of people living at the home and recognise their individuality. When we spoke to staff they showed their knowledge of the content of the care plans by describing people’s individual care needs, including approach. They told us how staff handovers meant that they could be kept to date with people’s changing needs. Four people told us they always receive the support and care they need, and two people said they sometimes did. Three relatives told us during the inspection that they were extremely pleased with the care, and three relatives told us in their surveys that the home always met the needs of their relative and gave them the care that they expected. On the day of the inspection, a staff member told us they changed their shifts so they could accompany a person living at the home to a health appointment. This was because they were the person’s keyworker, which is a role to help provide continuity of care and approach. Care plans and the home’s diary also showed this good practice. Care plans also showed how staff observed physical and mental health concerns and contacted appropriate health professionals, and we saw evidence of this good practice on the day of the inspection. We met with a visiting health professional who was positive about the competency of staff and said that they were contacted appropriately and that their advice was followed. Two GPs said the home communicated clearly with them and worked in partnership, and demonstrated a clear understanding of the care needs of people. They both stated that they were satisfied with the overall care with one person commenting ‘very’. A third GP said that the home was ‘pretty good to outstanding’. Five people told us in their surveys that that they always received the medical support they needed, and one person said usually. We observed medication practice and saw this was managed in a safe way. People living at the home are assessed to manage their own medication, with a recorded assessment on their care file, which also highlights their responsibility to ensure other people’s safety i.e. not to leave medication unsupervised. We saw improvements to the completion of the medication administration charts, although there were still a Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 few handwritten alterations, which had not been double signed, which is not best practice in case of an error. We checked the storage of medication and saw that the medication trolley was kept securely when it was not in use. Two GPs confirmed that the home manages individual’s medication appropriately, although one relative raised a concern in their survey about occasional errors. We saw clear guidance to staff regarding the management of medication, including what to do if medication is wrongly administered. Five people told us in their surveys that staff listened and acted upon what they said. One person added the comment ‘some do and some don’t’ and a sixth person said ‘not always’. The Expert by Experience spoke with ten people during the inspection who expressed satisfaction with staff approach and one person said that there were ‘helpful staff for whom nothing was too much trouble’. Other people told us that they were ‘very happy’ and that staff were ‘very good, they do what they can for me’. We observed staff interactions with people living at the home, which were generally positive and relaxed. Relatives told us that staff listened to them. Care plans promote people’s dignity by giving clear guidance to staff about approach. For example, the care plans promote respecting people’s choice and not talking over people. Staff could also give us examples of good practice, such as talking to and explaining actions to people during the use of the hoist to ensure they feel involved and reassured. A relative commented that ‘the staff always treat my mother with respect and are very caring towards her. She has an especially good ‘keyworker’ who looks after all her needs’. In the home’s AQAA the manager told us that ‘ residents are encouraged and supported to remain in control of their own finances for as long as possible in keeping with the promotion and support of their independence and dignity’. We saw evidence of how a person living at the home was supported with this aspect of their life. We heard about how people were supported to maintain relationships and how people were offered a choice to change rooms to maintain their privacy and dignity, and to meet their changing needs. We saw from the minutes of a staff meeting that the manager’s stressed the importance of confidentiality and creating a positive ambience. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We looked at standards 12,13,14 and15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home welcomes visitors, has a flexible routine and provides good meals; there is a range of activities, which generally meets the needs of the people living there. EVIDENCE: We saw from the home’s notice board that the weekly activities were clearly displayed, which included the hairdresser and a church service. From the minutes of the residents’ meeting we saw that people were encouraged to come up with ideas or suggestions for trips or entertainment. Suggestions include creating hanging flower baskets and we saw arrangements for a trip to a local garden centre. We were given the impression by a number of people that they liked their own company and were content just to meet up at mealtimes. Other people praised the location of the home and told us they enjoyed going out with friends and family, as well as with staff to access local shops and cafes. We observed other people going out to attend local social groups. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Care records and the home’s communication diary for staff showed how the home supported people’s lifestyles by being flexible in their approach i.e. ensuring that meals did not clash with their plans. People in their surveys told us that the home always had activities that they could take part in and another said usually, with one person saying sometimes. In the home’s AQAA it states that, ‘Residents are actively encouraged to keep contact with their relatives living in the outside community and maintain contact with friends, we support our residents to do this and will support them to receive visitors in their own room or a communal area, such as a lounge or the patio/garden area. We will always accommodate with refreshments on request and relatives can stay for meals at no extra cost (just the same as if the resident was back in their own home)’. People living at the home told us that their visitors were made welcome and relatives told us that this was the case in their surveys. During the inspection, we saw visitors’ areas being used by people entertaining guests to the home, and visitors told us that they were made to feel welcome, with two people commenting that hospitality had improved in the last six months. The Expert by Experience said in their report that ‘there was general satisfaction with the Home and all that it offered, not least they had the freedom to live as they chose e.g. joining in with activities or not, while having the security of staff on call if needed’. She also noted that while activities were popular with some people for others they were not considered vital, as they were happy ‘to do their own thing’. Visitors told us that their relatives often preferred their own space to continue with interests such as reading, which is respected by staff. Other visitors told us that their relative had been offered a choice of room. Where possible the home discusses décor with people living at the home and their relatives. We saw an example of this on the day of the inspection, although there had been a lack of communication over the final choice of colour. However, the relative was very positive about how the home ensured they were involved. On the day of our inspection, a number of people praised the food, which they said was well cooked and well presented. A recurring comment, as on our last visit to the home was the quality of the food, which was described as ‘good home cooking’. In response to our survey, three people said that they always liked the meals and three people said they usually did. A relative described the food as ‘excellent’. We observed the cook talking to people on an individual basis about their choices for their meals the next day and have seen from previous resident’s meetings that people can influence the menu. We also saw how the manager has promoted at a staff meeting people’s individual requests for meals i.e. buying individual portions for special. Staff told us about adapting the menu for people who are unwell and we saw clear information about ensuring staff knew who had a specialist diet. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We looked at standards 16 and 18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has an accessible complaints procedure, and people feel they can raise concerns as staff are approachable. Staff are aware of their responsibilities to help protect people from abuse. EVIDENCE: The home has its complaints procedure on the residents’ notice board, although this needs to be updated. On the day of the inspection, people told us that staff were approachable. Six people told us in their surveys that they knew how to make a complaint and that they generally knew who to speak to if they were unhappy. Relatives said they generally knew how to make a complaint and said that the home responded appropriately with concerns. Since the last inspection, the home have put into practice a concerns book which shows how they address issues to ensure people feel listened to. In the AQAA, the manager states that ‘we listen and respond to residents who have a concern and deal with their concerns quickly and with their involvement to promote transparency and communication with them so this problem does not happen again showing them how we have learned from this’. We saw examples of this during the inspection. All the people who spoke to the Expert by Experience said that they did not Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 have a grievance of complaint; CSCI have not received a complaint since the last inspection and GPs told us that they are not aware of any complaints. The manager showed us how they had addressed a concern raised by a relative but told us they were waiting for the relative to meet with them to give feedback. We looked at training records, which showed that staff had received training about safeguarding vulnerable adults and this knowledge of their responsibilities was demonstrated in their responses during individual discussion, although they needed prompting regarding what other agencies they could contact. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We looked at standards 19 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home’s environment is suitable for the needs of the people living there but there are areas that have become tired and worn in appearance. EVIDENCE: On the day of the inspection, the home was odour free and the general appearance in public areas was good, although some of the carpets were quite badly stained in hallways and some walls marked above heaters. Since the last inspection, the home has replaced vertical blinds in the dining room, new chairs in both lounges and purchased a rug doctor to help preserve carpets. The home’s AQAA states that there is a maintenance schedule for the home with records kept. A relative said how much they appreciated the help of the maintenance person to put up shelves and pictures. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 It also states that ‘we encourage residents to make their rooms as homely as they can by furnishing them as they please and by having personal things around them that are important to them or hold special memories to them, such as pictures and photographs and ornaments, we have found that each of these items holds a memory for residents and help to make their rooms a home from home’. The Expert by Experience confirmed that this was the case and commented on the cleanliness of people’s individual rooms. People and visitors gave mixed responses about the cleanliness of the home, particularly peoples’ bedrooms, some said rooms were clean and others thought there was room for improvement in the cleanliness of bedrooms. The manager told us the home plans to employ a cleaner to give each room a thorough Spring clean, which is also documented in the residents’ minutes. On the day of the inspection, the home was clean and odour free, people we spoke to told us the home was kept clean. Staff could tell us about infection control procedures, records showed their training was up to date, and the manager told us about how he had liaised with appropriate agencies after illness at the home. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We looked at standards 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. Staffing levels meet the needs of people and the procedures for staff recruitment help promote peoples’ safety. People benefit from having skilled and friendly staff who have a good understanding of their needs EVIDENCE: The staff group consists of both male and female carers with a range of skills and experience. This is based on observation, discussion and staff records. Previously, male residents have said how they have appreciated the fact that they have the option of having a male carer support them with intimate care i.e. bathing. On the day of the inspection, the home was appropriately staffed. In the morning, there were five carers, a senior and the acting manager on duty, plus kitchen and domestic staff. This changes to four carers in the afternoon and four carers in the evening. The home has two waking carers each night. The manager told us that staffing was increased during a period of illness at the home. Relatives told us that there were enough staff on duty, while four people living at the home told us there was always enough staff and two said sometimes. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 One person commented that they had to wait for their call bell to be answered. Other surveys from people living a the home did not raise staffing levels as problematic. The National Minimum Standards state fifty percent of the workforce should have achieved this qualification by 2005 to help work towards a skilled workforce. The home is still working towards this target. The manager told us that he had not recruited new permanent staff to the home since the last inspection but we saw how he had ensured that a previous gap in employment records has now been accounted for. Currently the home is using agency staff to supplement its staff team. We talked to staff about training and they confirmed this was promoted within the home and staff training records reflected this and were up to date. People’s perception of staff skills was that generally they had the right skills and experience, although one person raised concerns about the knowledge of agency staff. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): We looked at standards 31,32,33,35 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is well run, maintains good accounting and safety practices for the protection of the people living there with a good communication system. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection, the acting manager Trevor Lewis has had his application to be registered manager approved by CSCI. We gained feedback from people living at the home and people visiting the home that the atmosphere is friendly and staff are approachable. Minutes from a recent staff meeting also stress the importance of maintaining an open door policy for staff and others to bring concerns or queries. Staff members said that there was good communication within the home i.e. how information is shared amongst Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 the staff team about people’s care needs. Two staff members told us they feel well supported. In the home’s AQAA, we were told that there are residents’ meetings every three months which relatives are invited to attend. These meetings are minuted, which we saw, and have outcomes recorded for points raised. We were told about changes that have been introduced as a result. The service also sends out annual resident and relatives’ questionnaires, and uses the feedback to help construct the home’s annual development plan. We saw the collated feedback from relatives, which was positive. The manager told us the collated results are then displayed on the noticeboard. The manager told us that the home actively encourages opinions, comments and concerns. He gave the example of a one hundred percent occupancy and the home’s waiting list to show the popularity and the value for money of the home. We spot checked the management of three people’s personal allowances and saw that they could be audited and were accurate. The home’s AQAA states that safety checks are up to date, and when we spot checked staff training records they showed us that training around health and safety issues are up to date. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 x x 3 x x N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 2 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 2 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 3 4 x 3 x x 3 Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard OP19 Good Practice Recommendations All areas of the home should be well maintained by a regular programme of maintenance. This includes redecoration and re-carpeting. Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection South West Colston 33 33 Colston Avenue Bristol BS1 4UA 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 Jack Simpson House DS0000071068.V364827.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!