Inspection on 21/06/06 for Kingland House

This inspection was carried out on 21st June 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. 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

Kingland House 18/01/08

Kingland House 01/10/07

Kingland House 24/10/05

Kingland House 06/06/05

Kingland House 27/09/04

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 09/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Kingland House 30 Kingland Road Poole Dorset BH15 1TP Lead Inspector Sally Wernick Key Unannounced Inspection 10:00 21st June 2006 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 DS0000060603.V300385.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. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Kingland House Address 30 Kingland Road Poole Dorset BH15 1TP 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) 01202 673124 Buckland Care Limited Miss Leanne Natalie Buckland Care Home 22 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (22) of places DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 24th October 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Kingland House is a care home registered to provide accommodation and care to a maximum of 22 older people. It is situated within Poole Town centre and is close to local shops and public transport services. There are views of nearby Poole Park with its picturesque lake and level walks. The home has off-road parking for 6 cars; on-road parking is available but local restrictions apply. Resident accommodation is on the ground and first floors. There are 22 single occupancy bedrooms on the ground and first floors, 17 have en-suite hygiene facilities (including 8 with showers). All bedrooms contain a wash hand basin. To the rear of the home is a well-maintained garden. During 2004 the home was registered to Buckland Care Limited, which owns a number of other care homes in the south west of England. The general manager of the company is Mrs Pownall. The registered manager of Kingland House is Miss Leanne Buckland. During late 2005 and 2006 Buckland Care Limited intends to enlarge the home to provide additional rooms. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection visit was unannounced and began at 10.00am on Wednesday, 21st June 2006. This was a ‘key inspection’ where the homes performance against the key National Minimum Standards was assessed alongside progress in meeting requirements made at the last inspection. The Registered manager and a senior carer assisted the inspector, as did other members of staff. Methodology used included a tour of the premises, review of records and discussions with service users and staff. The inspector also reviewed the contact sheet for Kingland House and documentation submitted by the registered manager in response to requirements made at the last inspection. The Commission for Social Care also sent questionnaires to the home for them to distribute amongst residents, relatives and visiting professionals. At the time of writing 21 have been returned. A Pre-inspection questionnaire was also sent to the manager in order that information could be provided prior to the inspectors site visit. That information where relevant will be included in the main body of this report. What the service does well: Kingland House provides good care to residents who are mainly of low and medium levels of dependency and who are able to remain actively involved in decisions regarding their lives. The home provides a warm, comfortable environment with a kind and caring staff team and residents are assisted to maintain as much independence as possible. Good medication systems are in place and a dedicated activities assistant helps to ensure that social life within the home is enjoyable and varied. Meals are appetising and of good quality and quantity. Residents are treated with respect, their privacy is protected and staff, are kind and supportive. A complaints procedure is in place and staff and residents feel that they can confidently approach the registered manager. There is regular adult protection training. The staff team are stable and benefit from good leadership. Sound recruitment procedures are in place and staff receives structured induction and on-going training. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Comprehensive health and safety systems are in place. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Care plans have not yet improved despite repeated requirements. Action must now be taken to meet the required timescale. Plans are now underway to secure locks with suitable keys on doors to service users private accommodation. Risk assessments must identify specific risks and detail what action needs to be taken to minimise harm. The registered person must ensure that special food diets are provided in line with correctly assessed individual residents requirements. The registered persons must ensure the safe storage of food. Foodstuffs must not be exposed to toxic substances and any risk to residents or staff must be immediately removed. There must be written evidence confirming the safety of the gas installation. (Carried forward from previous inspection). It is recommended that social care plans are formulated that identify following assessment, how their individual, social, recreational, cultural and religious needs can be met. All complaints and concerns should be contained in one record these should include details of investigation and any action taken and should be audited at required intervals. A minimum ratio of 50 of care staff should have the NVQ level 2 awards in care or equivalent by the extended date of 2006. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 In order to meet the needs of the resident group all relevant staff should receive training in dementia awareness. The Registered manager must develop quality assurance methods based upon seeking the views of service users and other interested parties, to ensure success in achieving the aims and objectives of the home. An annual development plan must be produced reflecting the outcome of the consultation. 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. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. Prior to admission the needs of each proposed resident are initially assessed and the home confirms in writing the ability to care for them however information gathered at pre-admission assessment is not used in formulating an effective plan of care therefore the resident cannot be sure needs will be met. The home does not provide intermediate care this standard was not therefore inspected. EVIDENCE: Pre-assessments are undertaken on a standard format adopted by Kingland House. This format contains basic information but limited space does not allow for detailed information on prospective residents this is subsequently recorded in a care plan. The records of two new service users were examined one of which was admitted to the home for a period of respite care. Neither resident DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 had a care plan in place. One service user has been living at the home for seven weeks. Pre-admission assessment had taken place two days prior to moving in to the home a formal offer of a place was made ten days later. The absence of a care plan means that assessed needs might not be met appropriately. In addition there is insufficient evidence of involvement or consultation in the assessment process and no clear agreement on outcomes. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. Staff does not have all of the written information necessary to ensure the provision of correct care to each resident. Not all residents have care plans those that do are brief, inaccurate and out of date. Those residents who receive respite care do not have care plans in place to enable the home to promote and maximise independence and to assist them in their return home. Resident’s health and welfare needs are met in part through visits to doctors and other health professionals as required. Medicine storage, handling and recording is properly carried out to ensure that residents receive medicines as prescribed. Residents are treated with respect and their privacy is protected. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 EVIDENCE: The two previous inspections have highlighted the need for to improve careplanning documentation in order that changes may be properly recorded. The care documentation was reviewed for six residents during this inspection two of whom had no care plans of the other four two contained inaccurate out of date information. All lacked a comprehensive and detailed plan of care. One resident who required a low residue diet was described as needing a high fibre diet, which had impacted on the quality of care received. Another with shortterm memory loss was described as a good communicator when this clearly was not the case. A resident receiving respite care had no plan in place to help maximise independence or to promote a return home. Daily care notes evidenced they were unhappy at Kingland road the absence of a long-term plan of care however meant that it was unclear as to why they were there. There was no evidence of the resident’s involvement or consultation in the assessment process. No independent advocate was involved and there was a clear lack of agreement between the resident, family, and home. Care plan reviews were in place but these were “tick Boxes” and did not provide place for written reviews. There was no evidence of consultation with residents and were not updated to reflect changing needs and current objectives for health and personal care. Risk assessments are in place but again lack detail referring only to the condition not the nature of the risk or how it could best be managed. During a tour of the premises one resident who normally rises at 7am, and requires the support of two staff with personal care was in the absence of this found to be still in bed at 10am despite the strong smell of faeces and clear need for assistance. Both the senior carer and registered manager expressed surprise that the resident had been found in their room and confirmed that the normal routine for this resident had not been adhered to. One explanation for this lack of care was a breakdown in communication between day and night staff. Care plans do contain information about contacts with other health professionals although again this was not comprehensive. Written survey forms were received by the CSCI from three nursing staff and two G.Ps all of whom agreed that the level of care received by residents was generally good although it was felt by one health care professional that staff were not always able to demonstrate a clear understanding of the needs of service users. On the day of the inspection a visiting chiropodist was at the home and confirmed to the inspector that the care of residents was in their opinion of a good standard. A previous requirement to record details, action and guidance on medical conditions such as diabetes has now been met and recorded in one residents care plan. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Fifteen written survey forms were received from residents only five of which contained any additional comments all expressed satisfaction with the general care and arrangements in the home. Comments received include: “I find the staff very kind and helpful.” “My family investigated for me and were justifiably impressed by the standard of care promised and the sight and smell of fresh food being prepared and cooked.” “Having passed through various hospital units I find my present home excellent.” “The staff are very kind and can’t do enough for you, and that includes everybody.” “There is usually a good atmosphere among the staff, which is to the residents advantage.” Medicines prescribed by doctors are safely stored and carefully administered to residents by staff that has received appropriate training, unless the residents have chosen to store and administer their own medicines. Risk assessment has been recorded for those who self-administer. Warning signs are displayed where oxygen is stored and used. Four residents were spoken to in their rooms three were able to confirm that they are treated with respect by staff and their right to privacy is maintained. Staff was observed to be polite and caring and residents confirmed they were kind and supportive when meeting their needs. A number of residents have telephones in their rooms all are able to see friends and family when and where they choose and at times which are flexible. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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 the following standard(s): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. The quality of daily life in the home is generally good with residents assisted to maintain as much independence as possible. Residents are able to benefit from activities provided by the home and are satisfied with the social care provided. Limited social care assessments do not provide staff with information concerning individual social and leisure choices for residents. Residents are supported in maintaining contact with family and friends and in making decisions about their lives in the home although increased awareness of independent advocacy services would be beneficial. Residents are provided with a varied menu offering choices of meals that generally meet dietary needs. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 EVIDENCE: Kingland House is located close to Poole Park and to Poole town centre. Some residents enjoy going out into the local community others prefer to receive friends and relatives at the home at times which are flexible for them. The home employs an activities organiser three days a week and a full programme of activities is available which includes events in the home, trips out and visiting entertainers. During the summer a fete was held which was able to raise monies for the residents fund enabling them to enjoy a number of trips to local beauty spots as well as enjoying shopping and coffee mornings. Some residents at the home are independent whilst others are limited in the range of activities they are able to engage in. Care plans examined did not record in any detail individual preferences regarding religious, cultural, recreational or leisure activities which is important for those who may be experiencing short term memory loss it is recommended therefore that social care plans be formulated for all residents to ensure that there is evidence of consultation and that wide ranging needs can be met. Residents spoken with confirmed that they maintain contact with family and friends and the registered manager confirmed that they are regularly invited to the homes events. Service users manage their own financial affairs and there was evidence that many have brought their own possessions into the home. During the inspection it was felt that at least two residents would benefit from having information on local advocacy services the registered manager confirmed that she would arrange this. Residents spoken to confirmed that meals provided by the home are good and plentiful. The inspector observed home baking and a tour of the food area revealed fresh produce. Written responses from service users indicated that the food was “usually” good with a regular change of a well-balanced menu. It was noted on the care plan of one service user that the special diet had been wrongly recorded resulting in them receiving high fibre food. The home must maintain up to date care plans and ensure that special diets are provided in line with resident’s individual requirements. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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 the following standard(s): 16,18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. Complaints are generally managed properly and residents are confident that their complaints will be listened to and acted on. Procedures for responding to suspicions of abuse are clear and there is an up to date policy in place. EVIDENCE: Residents spoken to and written surveys confirm that they would know who to talk to if they had any complaints or concerns. There is a complaints procedure in place and the complaints book is subject to review. However, examination of the manager’s daily logbook included a concern expressed by a resident to a member of staff. This was addressed and successfully resolved by the registered manager. All complaints and concerns should be contained in one record these should include details of investigation and any action taken and should be audited at required intervals. The home has up-to-date policies and procedures in place to protect residents from possible harm or abuse and staff, undertake regular training in the Protection of Vulnerable Adults. DS0000060603.V300385.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,24,26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. Kingland House is comfortable, safe and generally well maintained. Bedroom doors are not all fitted with locks of approved type so not all residents are able to key-lock their bedroom doors for privacy, when they temporarily leave the room. The home is generally clean and free from unpleasant odours laundry facilities are appropriately sited. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 EVIDENCE: The home offers large attractive accommodation with comfortable communal areas and personalised bedrooms. An extension is currently underway a further 10 bedrooms are to be created whilst the current bedrooms are to be improved to enable all to have en-suite facilities. This will create a high degree of upheaval for residents and will need to be managed sensitively by staff with appropriate risk assessments in place for residents who may experience difficulties in the transition. Doors to resident’s rooms have not yet been fitted with suitable locks although evidence that the work has been commissioned was provided to the inspector and should be completed shortly. Rooms have been suitably double-glazed and double glazed windows replaced in line with a previous recommendation. Laundry facilities are sited appropriately and staff has received training in basic hygiene and infection control. The registered manager confirmed that up to date policies and procedures are in place. DS0000060603.V300385.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29,30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. Service users benefit from adequate staffing levels for their needs and from safe recruitment standards for the employment of staff. There is a programme of formal training designed to improve and develop staff knowledge and skills for the benefit of people living at the home. EVIDENCE: Staffing ratios at Kingland House are sufficient to meet current resident’s assessed needs and staff do benefit from range of training including a structured induction programme. Five members of the current staff team are currently undertaking NVQ 2, one has completed. The registered manager has recently completed her training as an NVQ assessor it is hoped therefore that this will facilitate staffs progress further. The records of a recently employed staff member were examined and found to contain all of the necessary information. In line with a requirement from the previous inspection a full employment history was also recorded. Evidence was provided which demonstrated that staff, undertake induction training in accordance with TOPSS standards. A sample of ongoing staff training includes, moving and handling, fire training, food hygiene, POVA, safe DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 handling of medication and infection control. Some staff are also undertaking training in dementia awareness. It is strongly recommended that activities staff also undertake this training to ensure that they fully understand the presenting and changing needs of residents at Kingsland House. DS0000060603.V300385.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35,38. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement is made from evidence gathered during the inspection, which included a visit to the service and takes into account the views and experiences of people using the service. The registered manager is experienced and generally manages the home in the best interests of service users. There are systems in place for service user consultation and residents do benefit from the home being run with their interests in mind. This needs to be extended however to include families, supporters, community health providers and other stakeholders. Resident’s financial interests are safeguarded. The home generally follows practices that promote and safeguard the health, safety and welfare of service users. DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 EVIDENCE: The registered manager is well qualified and is respected by staff and residents alike who are reassured by her confident, knowledgeable open approach to management in the home. One resident commented “Leanne always has time for you”. Management do speak to and consult with service users about care provision and questionnaires are distributed to residents on an annual basis. However this is not extended to family, friends, staff or community health professionals. Results of surveys are not yet collated and included in the homes annual development plan. In order to protect residents, it is the policy of the home not to have any involvement in their personal finances. All residents who are unable or do not wish to handle their own affairs, have a relative or other representative to support them in managing their finances. Records evidence that staff have undertaken relevant Health and Safety training and all servicing and maintenance of equipment was confirmed by the registered manager to be up to date. Inspection of the premises demonstrated that routine maintenance and refurbishment work was being implemented. Fire records demonstrate that staff has received regular training. Recent requirements made following a visit from the Environmental Health Officer had also been implemented. The home has comprehensive Health and Safety systems in place to ensure the safety and welfare of residents. Staff receive regular training in Moving and Handling, First Aid, food hygiene and infection control. However on the day of the inspection fresh foodstuffs were found to be stored close to toxic substances presenting a risk of harm to both staff and residents resulting in an immediate requirement. A requirement relating to the testing of emergency lighting equipment made at the last inspection was found to met. Written evidence confirming the safety of a gas installation was not inspected and will therefore be carried forward to the next inspection. DS0000060603.V300385.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 2 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 1 8 2 9 3 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 2 17 X 18 3 3 X X x X 2 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 X 2 X 3 X X 2 DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes 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 4& Schedule 1 17 Requirement Information gained at preadmission assessment must be used to formulate an effective plan of care. A comprehensive care plan must be recorded for each resident. Previous timescales of 01/08/0501/12/05 not met. Risk assessments must identify specific risks and detail what action needs to be taken to minimise harm. The registered person must ensure that that special food diets are provided in line with correctly assessed individual residents requirements. The registered persons must ensure the safe storage of food. Foodstuffs must not be exposed to toxic substances and any risk to residents or staff must be immediately removed. There must be written evidence confirming the safety of the gas installation (not inspected and carried forward from previous inspection) Timescale for action 21/07/06 1. OP3 2. OP7 21/07/06 3. OP7 13 21/07/06 4. OP15 16 21/07/06 5. OP38 13 21/06/06 6. OP38 13 21/07/06 DS0000060603.V300385.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. Refer to Standard OP12 Good Practice Recommendations It is recommended that social care plans are formulated that identify following assessment, how their individual, social, recreational, cultural and religious needs can be met. All complaints and concerns should be contained in one record these should include details of investigation and any action taken and should be audited at required intervals. Doors to service users private accommodation should be fitted with locks suited to service users capabilities and accessible to staff in emergencies. Service users should be provided with keys unless their risk assessment suggests otherwise. This recommendation was also included in the report of the last three inspections. A minimum ratio of 50 of care staff should have the NVQ level 2 awards in care or equivalent by the extended date of 2006. In order to meet the needs of the resident group all relevant staff should receive training in dementia awareness. The Registered manager must develop quality assurance methods based upon seeking the views of service users and other interested parties, to ensure success in achieving the aims and objectives of the home. An annual development plan must be produced reflecting the outcome of the consultation. 1. 2. OP16 3. OP24 4. 5. OP28 OP30 6. OP33 DS0000060603.V300385.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Poole Office Unit 4 New Fields Business Park Stinsford Road Poole BH17 0NF 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 DS0000060603.V300385.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!