Inspection on 17/07/06 for James Court

This inspection was carried out on 17th July 2006.

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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 5 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

James Court 19/12/08

James Court 01/08/07

James Court 27/02/06

James Court 06/09/05

James Court 01/03/05

James Court 28/09/04

James Court 03/03/04

James Court 26/11/03

Similar services:

Polesworth Group Friary Road

Polesworth Group Pooley Heights

Polesworth Group 32 Station Road

Polesworth Group 70 Long Street

Breme

Polesworth Group 64 Long Street

Polesworth Group 68 Long Street

10 Whitfield Avenue

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 James Court 6 St Pauls Square Burton On Trent Staffordshire DE14 2EF Lead Inspector Jane Capron Key Unannounced Inspection 17 July 2006 09:30 James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service James Court Address 6 St Pauls Square Burton On Trent Staffordshire DE14 2EF 01283 740411 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) Mrs Perpetua Jasmine Sathianathan Mr Sivasubramaniam Kathirgiamathamby Sathianathan Mrs Perpetua Jasmine Sathianathan Care Home 12 Category(ies) of Learning disability (12), Learning disability over registration, with number 65 years of age (1) of places James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 27th February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: James Court is a residential home located in the centre of Burton, Staffordshire. The home provides a service for twelve adults of both gender groups who have a learning disability. The home cannot provide care for residents with severe learning disabilities or with severe challenging behaviour. The large Victorian detached property provides six single occupancy bedrooms and three shared rooms. The home has a lounge, dining room and a quiet room/music room located on the ground floor. The home had a large domestic kitchen, where service users are encouraged and supported to prepare and cook their own meals and drinks. Bathrooms and toilets were located throughout the home and were in close proximity to bedrooms and communal areas. The home is not registered for physical disability and would not be suitable for individuals who are wheelchair users; grab rails are provided through parts of the home. Due to the location of the home it is accessible via public transport and all local amenities are within a short walking distance. Limited parking space is provided within the grounds. Current fee levels are £550- £1000 per week. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection took place over one day lasting approximately seven hours. This inspection included discussions with residents at the home, several staff members and the Owner/ Care Manager. A sample of support plans were examined as well as the procedures for administrating medication and safe guarding residents’ finances. The inspection also looked at residents’ lifestyle and opportunities to take part in activities both in and out of the home and to develop independent living skills. The environment was looked at including several of the residents’ bedrooms. A range of documents relating to Health and Safety were examined. Since the last inspection there has been one complaint relating to the care of residents. This is still ongoing and the home has taken the required action to safeguard the residents. What the service does well: Residents liked living at the home and liked the staff. Comments were made such as it is ‘a good place to live’, ‘I like it here’ and ‘I like the staff’. Residents said that they had lots to do and went out often, going shopping, to the cinema, bowling, out for meals and out for day trips. A number of the residents went to the day services several sessions a week. The home activity staff member had developed activities aimed at developing residents’ skills, knowledge and self-esteem. Recent examples were a first aid course which the residents really enjoyed having the opportunity to try out such tasks as resuscitation, and putting together a meal for a group of invited guests where the residents did the planning, the cooking and the serving. Residents said they had the opportunity to make choices and to participate in activities related to the running of the home. The home had resident meetings. The home had organised a holiday and residents had been involved in choosing where they went and what they were to do when there were there. Residents were involved in cooking, shopping, cleaning and tidying their bedrooms. The home was meeting the physical health care needs of the residents. Residents confirmed that they attended the doctor when they felt ill, had eye and dental checks and attended for chiropody services. Residents received psychiatric services when needed and the home involved Speech and Language James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 therapists and Community Nurses. The home was meeting the medication needs of the residents. The home had a good level of staff trained to NVQ level 3. The staff had completed the required Health and Safety training. 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. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2,4 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home’s admission procedure ensures that an assessment is completed and that prospective residents have the opportunity to visit prior to making the decision to move to the home. EVIDENCE: Sampling of files demonstrated that residents had an assessment prior to moving to the home. This covered the areas of health and personal care, communication, leisure, social and educational needs. There had not been any recent admissions but the home’s procedure was for prospective residents to visit the home and to stay overnight prior top any decision being made. The home was in the process of developing a pre admission programme for a prospective resident and this was to include visits and overnight stays at the home. Placements were made on a trail basis only confirmed following a review. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7,8,9 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Whilst the home had developed support plans and risk assessments that identified residents’ needs and showed staff how could meet residents’ needs there was scope for further development and for increased resident involvement in the planning process. The home promoted residents’ choices and participation in a range of activities however they were further areas that could be developed to increase residents’ involvement. EVIDENCE: A sample of support plans were examined. This showed that the needs of residents had been identified and that the information was available for staff to be able to meet the identified needs. The support plans covered areas of health including mental health, personal care as well as social needs but would benefit from further development in areas such as behavioural and communication issues. Discussions with residents showed them to be involved in the support planning process. The home had plans in place to develop the James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 care planning process and this should include further resident involvement and plans to be in a more person centred format. The home had a range of individual risk assessments in place including risks relating to the environment such as using kitchen equipment and bathing. These would benefit from being expanded. Discussions with residents confirmed they were consulted over a range of issues including meals and activities. One resident stated that she had chosen the lunchtime meal. She had suggested fish and chips and she and a staff member had been to the shop to get them. Residents had been able to choose the meal they wanted from the chip shop. Residents confirmed that they were able to make choices over how they spent their time. One resident said that he used to go to a club but had decided not to go any more finding it boring. Residents said that they could choose whether to join in with activities or not. They said they could decide when to get up and go to bed within the context of their agreed schedules. Residents were able to go to their bedrooms during the day when they wanted to or could sit in either of the communal lounges. Residents went out shopping with staff to buy such things as toiletries and clothes. Residents were involved in range of activities related to the running of the home. They were involved in deciding on menus, doing the food shopping, helping prepare meals and laying and clearing the table. Residents said they had meetings where household matters and activities were discussed. There was scope for further involvement in such areas as staff recruitment and in policy development. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 11,12,13,15,16,17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Whilst the home provides a range of opportunities for residents to take part in independent living activities the home needs to further develop its communication plans and to develop information in user-friendly formats to aid understanding for those with specialist communication needs. The residents had regular opportunities to access the community and to take part in a range of social and leisure activities. EVIDENCE: The home was providing residents with the opportunity to develop their skills. Speech and language therapists had assessed residents with specialist communication needs. The plans in respect of communication should be better developed to ensure staff are fully aware of the methods of communication to be used. There was also scope for information to be in a more user-friendly format for example individual schedules and menus in pictorial formats. Residents were involved in a range of independent living tasks including James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 preparing meals, cleaning their bedrooms and meal planning and food shopping. A number of residents attended day services several times a week. The home had an activity staff member who worked with residents undertaking a range of activities aimed at developing their skills and self esteem. The residents had recently taken part in a two-day first aid activity and residents said they had really enjoyed this. They had the opportunity to try such activities as resuscitation. The home was also working with residents to develop their skills in cooking and in kitchen activities. The activity staff member was also spending time with residents preparing them to go on holiday through looking at maps and facilities in the area. The home was also working with residents to develop their literary skills. Residents said that went out regularly. They went to the shops, the hairdressers, the doctor and dentist. They also said they went to the cinema and bowling, out for meals and out for walks. Within the home they said they had the opportunity to do craftwork, do jigsaws and that they enjoyed watching TV and videos. Several residents said they went to church. The home had arranged a holiday for residents. Residents said they were involved in choosing where they went. Residents pay for this themselves. The home pays for the staffing costs and provides each resident with money to make up for the money they have already paid for food at the home. All residents spoken to were aware where they were going and had plans over what they wanted to do on holiday. The home had no transport of its own and made use of taxis, public transport or staff cars. The home welcomed visitors at any reasonable time. Residents stated that they had visitors. Residents were supported to maintain and develop friendships. One resident said that her boyfriend visited her at the home. The homes’ routines were quite flexible. Discussions with residents confirmed this. Residents could access their bedrooms and the communal rooms throughout the day. Residents stated that they had choice over their meals. It was noted during the inspection that one resident had chosen to sit outside to eat their lunch. Bedrooms had locks on their doors but residents chose not to use these. After lunch staff and residents were observed sitting with residents and chatting together in a relaxed manner. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19,20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is able to meet the health care and personal care needs of the residents. The procedure for the administration of medication is ensuring that the medication needs are being met. EVIDENCE: The support plans identified the health and personal care needs of the residents. All residents that completed the pre inspection questionnaire said that they were well cared for. Residents said that the staff provided them any help they needed. Observations showed residents to be suitably dressed and to have received hair and nail care. One resident explained the amount of support they needed in respect of bathing and shaving. The home supported residents to buy clothes and toiletries. Residents said that staff respected their privacy always knocking on doors before entering. The home operated a key worker system and residents were able to say who their key worker was. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Residents were receiving healthcare services. Records showed that residents received dental and eye checks and the chiropodist visited the home. A range of specialist health care staff were involved with residents at the home. A number of residents received psychiatric services including regular psychiatric and medication reviews. Residents that had specialist communication needs had been assessed by the speech and language therapist. The home had the involvement of the nurse specialising in epilepsy. Discussions with two health professionals identified that the home had developed satisfactory liaison with them and that they felt the home provided satisfactory care for residents, some having complex needs. One professional said that the home would always ask if they did not know something and that they identified and monitored difficult behaviour effectively. They said that residents made progress at the home and that the home empowered residents and developed residents’ self esteem. The home had procedures for the administration of medication. The records showed that medication was being administered appropriately. There were no gaps in the records and when medication had not been administered by the home this was recorded with the reason. Medication was stored appropriately. The home had a procedure in place for administering homely remedies. Staff had received training in the safe handling of medication. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22,23 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents felt that staff listened to them and acted on any concerns they raised but they would benefit from having the complaints procedure in a more user-friendly format. The home had an adult protection procedure in place but the home needed to ensure that all staff were aware of the procedure and had the necessary knowledge to be able to protect the residents. EVIDENCE: The home had a complaints procedure in place and had plans to develop this into a more accessible format. The home had one complaint outstanding relating to issues of adult protection that was currently being investigated. The home’s actions had ensured that residents were protected. The home involved advocates as necessary. One resident had an advocate and the resident stated that the advocate visited him regularly. Residents spoken to were aware of how to complain. They stated that they would raise issues either with staff individually or at resident meetings. All stated that staff listened to them and would act on any concerns they raised. The home had an adult protection procedure and this procedure was included in all new staff’s induction programme. However one staff member spoken to was not aware of the procedure. The home had procedures in place to safeguard the residents’ money. Records for each resident were kept separately. Suitable records were being kept and expenditure was supported James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 by receipts. Residents all had bank accounts and most residents went to the bank to draw out money. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24,26,27,28,30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provides residents with satisfactory accommodation including communal areas all in a domestic style. Bedroom accommodation, single and double, was satisfactory, being lockable and having sufficient storage facilities and providing seating for residents and providing bedrooms that were lockable. The upstairs bathroom would benefit from being decorated. The home provided residents with clean and tidy accommodation and where they were cleaning schedules in place to prevent the risk of the spread of infection. EVIDENCE: The home provided adequate accommodation. The home was located close to the town centre. The home provided satisfactory bedroom accommodation, six single and three double rooms that was lockable and provided sufficient storage and seating. Bedrooms had TVs. One of the residents in a double room was spoken to and they said they liked sharing and would not want a single room. The home did not have any bedrooms with ensuite facilities. Residents James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 said they liked their bedrooms and many were personalised. The home had suitable communal accommodation having two lounges, one being smaller and with no TV. The home had domestic style kitchen and dining room. The home had sufficient bathing and toilet facilities, although the upstairs bathroom would benefit from being decorated. The home was clean and tidy throughout and had cleaning schedules in place to prevent the spread of infections. Staff had received training in infection control. The home had a small laundry that was adequate to meet the laundry needs of the residents. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34,35 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents were generally protected by the home’s recruitment processes although the home needed to ensure that all staff provided health information. The staff had the basic knowledge to be able to work with the residents although there were aspects of training that could improve the service. EVIDENCE: A sample of personnel files were examined during the inspection. This showed that the home had undertaken employment checks including staff references and CRB and POVA checks. The records showed that the home was checking staff’s identity. The home did not always ensure that checks were made that staff were fit to work at the home. Residents said they liked the staff and throughout the inspection residents were seen approaching staff and there was a relaxed atmosphere. Residents and staff were observed chatting together. Discussion with staff showed that they were aware of residents needs. The home had developed working relationships with health care specialists. Staff were provided with induction training and with training related to residents’ needs, for example epilepsy. The residents could benefit from the staff having increased knowledge and understanding of people that exhibit James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 verbal and physical aggression as a means of communicating needs and from staff having greater knowledge of communication techniques and working in a person centred way. Five of the support staff had achieved NVQ level 3 and a further staff member had NVQ three in working with people with special needs. Two staff were currently in the process of taking the qualification. Several staff had also undertaken some LDAF training. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39,42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents’ benefit from a home that is satisfactorily led. The home had some systems in place to review and monitor the service provided but there was scope for further development. The home’s health and safety procedures were protecting the residents but the home needed to develop its evacuation procedures. EVIDENCE: The home’s proprietor was also the Care Manager. She had a nursing background in working with people with a learning disability and had completed NVQ level 4 in management. She had undertaken a range of training to ensure she kept up to date with current care practices. The home had a number of quality checks in place including monitoring the standard of the environment including health and safety. The home also undertook yearly surveys of residents and relatives. The results of these were James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 seen during the inspection. The home had an improvement plan that includes aspects of decorating the home, developing information in a user-friendly format and improved activities for residents. The home had Health and safety procedures in place. The home had procedures in place for the safe storage and handling of hazardous substances. Servicing was recorded to be have been completed. The fire records were examined and the home was undertaking the necessary checks on fire equipment, including the fire alarm and emergency lighting. The home did need to develop its evacuation plan to incorporate any specific needs of residents. Portable appliance testing had taken place and the home had a current electrical installation certificate. The home undertook water tests to prevent the legionella bacteria. The staff had completed the expected Health and Safety training including fire, first aid, food hygiene and moving and handling. James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 3 3 X 4 3 5 X INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 2 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 3 27 3 28 3 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 2 33 X 34 2 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 3 3 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 4 13 3 14 4 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 2 X James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 no Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA34 Regulation 19 Sch.2 Requirement To ensure that staff are physically and mentally fit to undertake the work. To ensure that all staff have the necessary knowledge or training to safeguard residents from being harmed or suffering abuse. To provide staff with training/knowledge in understanding and working with people with aggressive behaviour and in communication techniques To maintain a record of all visitors to the home. To further develop the evacuation plan to include any specific needs of residents. Timescale for action 18/07/06 2. YA23 13(6) 01/10/06 3. YA32 18(1)(i) 01/11/06 4. 5. YA42 YA42 17(2) Schedule 4 23(c)(iii) 18/07/06 01/09/06 James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 YA1 Good Practice Recommendations That information such as service user guide and complaints procedure be provided in a format more accessible to residents. To further develop the behavioural support plans and to develop comprehensive communication plans for those with specialist communication needs and to provide information in a more user friendly format for example pictorial daily schedules and menus. To consider developing person centred plans To improve the quality of risk assessments. To look at ways of increasing the level of consultation with, and participation by the residents in their lives and in aspects of running the home for example in the recruitment of staff. To decorate the upstairs bathroom To develop a training profile for the home. 2. YA6 3. 4. 5. YA6 YA9 YA8 6. 7. YA24 YA35 James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Stafford Office Dyson Court Staffordshire Technology Park Beaconside Stafford ST18 0ES 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 James Court DS0000004963.V301812.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!