Please wait

Please note that the information on this website is now out of date. It is planned that we will update and relaunch, but for now is of historical interest only and we suggest you visit cqc.org.uk

Inspection on 20/09/06 for Laurel Court Nursing Home

Also see our care home review for Laurel Court Nursing Home for more information

This inspection was carried out on 20th September 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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.

What the care home does well

What has improved since the last inspection?

The home had continued to maintain a programme of redecoration that included the main entrance and reception area as well as some bedrooms. The lounge on the ground floor unit had also been redecorated. Staffing levels within the home were monitored by the manager and, at the time of the inspection appeared to be appropriate to meet the needs of the residents living at the home.

What the care home could do better:

Details regarding care planning for the residents varied amongst the units within the home. Care planning must be consistent to ensure that the identified needs of all residents and how these should be met are clearly stated within all the care plans and are available to staff. Due to the change in company providing the service at the home information had been transferred onto the new company`s documentation. Some details of the needs of the residents had not been maintained on individual care files and therefore information regarding the resident was not available to the staff who were assisting the residents with their care. This could result in the residents not receiving the correct care and support that they required. Residents at the home had their care needs reviewed however, any change of care needs had not been recorded on the care plan.The recording of medication given to residents was not always recorded appropriately and as a result it was not possible to ensure that the residents had received the required medication. This could place the residents` health at risk. On some of the units within the home there was an excess of medication that needed returning to the pharmacy. It is important that an audit of medication is undertaken and appropriate records maintained of all medication received and returned to and from the home.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Laurel Court Nursing Home 1a Candleford Road Off Palatine Road Didsbury Manchester M20 3JH Lead Inspector Sarah Oldham Key Unannounced Inspection 9:00 20 September 2006 th 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 Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Laurel Court Nursing Home Address 1a Candleford Road Off Palatine Road Didsbury Manchester M20 3JH 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) 0161 446 2844 0161 446 2873 Ashbourne Homes Limited Care Home 86 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (75), Physical disability (11) of places Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The maximum number of service users requiring nursing care shall be 61. The service users requiring nursing care by reason of physical disability shall be accommodated on the lower ground floor. The service users requiring nursing care by reason of old age shall be accommodated on the second and third floors. The maximum number of service users requiring personal care only shall be 25, accommodated on the first floor. Registration is subject to compliance with the minimum nursing staffing levels indicated in the Notice of Variation of Conditions of Registration dated 8th March 2005. Personal care staffing levels will remain in line with those currently in place. One named service user requiring personal care is accommodated within a nursing unit. This place will revert to nursing care once this service user no longer requires this accommodation. 15th October 2005 3. 4. 5. 6. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Laurel Court is a care home providing nursing care, personal care and accommodation for 75 older people and nursing care for 11 adult service users who require care by reason of physical disability. The first floor is used to provide care only to older adults, and the second and third floors care with nursing to older adults. The home was opened in 1994 and is purpose built consisting of accommodation on four floors. The ground floor has been adapted to residents requiring care by reason of physical disability. The home has extensive gardens that were well maintained and readily accessible for residents. Ample car parking was available at the side and rear of the home. Each floor is served by two passenger lifts. The home is located in a residential area of Withington, South Manchester. Local amenities are available in Withington village and the area is served by an excellent bus network into the city centre. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The unannounced visit took place on Wednesday 20 September 2006. The visit formed part of the key inspection of the home and was undertaken by two inspectors who were at the home for 6 hours. As part of the visit time was spent with the residents who live at the home, observing how staff support the residents, discussions with staff and the manager, assessing relevant documents and files and a tour of the premises was undertaken. Some supporting evidence within this report was based on information received in the pre-inspection questionnaire that was submitted to Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) prior to this visit taking place. The CSCI had not received any complaints or concerns about the home since the last visit. What the service does well: The home carried out assessments of each prespective resident before admission to the home to make sure that the home could meet all the identified needs of the resident. The home had an open visiting policy and residents spoken to said that they could have visitors at any time. Information for residents and visitors was displayed on the notice boards within the reception area of the home including details about activities that were available. The residents’ spoken to were happy about the quality, choice and quantity of food. One resident said “you get more than enough food and there is always a choice”. The standard of décor throughout the home was good and there was an ongoing programme of decoration and maintenance in place. Residents were able to personalise their own bedrooms and residents spoken to felt that their bedrooms were comfortable and suitable for their needs. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Staff at the home appeared to have the appropriate skills to support the residents with their care needs. Staff were observed to treat the residents with dignity and respect and comments made by residents included “they are all really nice and helpful” and “ they help me and nothing is too much trouble”. Staff had received training and the manager ensured that all training that had been undertaken or that was planned had been recorded on individual staff files. However, there were some still some areas of training that some staff needed to undertake. The manager was able to demonstrate that the training had been planned. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Details regarding care planning for the residents varied amongst the units within the home. Care planning must be consistent to ensure that the identified needs of all residents and how these should be met are clearly stated within all the care plans and are available to staff. Due to the change in company providing the service at the home information had been transferred onto the new company’s documentation. Some details of the needs of the residents had not been maintained on individual care files and therefore information regarding the resident was not available to the staff who were assisting the residents with their care. This could result in the residents not receiving the correct care and support that they required. Residents at the home had their care needs reviewed however, any change of care needs had not been recorded on the care plan. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 The recording of medication given to residents was not always recorded appropriately and as a result it was not possible to ensure that the residents had received the required medication. This could place the residents’ health at risk. On some of the units within the home there was an excess of medication that needed returning to the pharmacy. It is important that an audit of medication is undertaken and appropriate records maintained of all medication received and returned to and from the home. 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. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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&6 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service The home undertakes an assessment of prospective residents’ care needs prior to their admission. EVIDENCE: The manager conducted a pre-admission assessment of prospective residents to ensure that the home could meet all their assessed needs. The manager said that following this assessment a letter was written to the prospective resident informing them whether the home was/was not able to meet their needs. For residents who were referred through Care Management arrangements the home obtained a summary of the Care Management Assessment prior to admission. The manager said that this assessment was kept with the resident’s care plan although two of the care plans examined did not have them. It is important that all relevant information regarding the identified needs of the Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 resident were made available to ensure that staff are aware of the level of care and support that an individual resident requires. The home did not provide an intermediate care service. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service Each resident had an individual plan of care. However, some areas of the plan required improvements to ensure residents’ health, personal and social care needs are fully met. The systems and procedures for dealing with medicines did not protect residents. EVIDENCE: A random sample of care plans were examined. Evidence was seen of ongoing work to improve the documentation of the care planning system although there were some areas that required further development. The care plan format had changed to Southern Cross Healthcare from the previous providers of the service, Ashbourne Care Homes but this change had not been reflected on the care plans examined. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 There was evidence that some care plans had been reviewed. However, one care plan had not been amended to incorporate the recent information gathered at the review. This could result in the resident not receiving the appropriate care and support that was required. Not all care plans had been signed by the resident and or their representative and although staff said that residents had been fully involved as far as possible, this was not evident in the documentation. Risk assessments had been completed which covered areas such as manual handling, nutrition and risk of falls. Two care plans examined did not reflect the outcome of the risk assessment and therefore could place the resident at risk. Evidence was seen of residents Care Management reviews that had been undertaken to ensure that the overall care and support of the resident at the home was being appropriately maintained The recording in the daily statements of health as found to be vague in places with statements such as ‘all hygiene care given’. It is recommended that more detail is recorded to accurately reflect the nursing care provided to individual residents. All residents were registered with local General Practitioners and had access to visiting healthcare professionals e.g., Dietician, Chiropody, Dentistry and Ophthalmology. This ensured residents were in receipt of appropriate health services necessary to support their health care needs. Medication Administration Records were examined and it was found that some MAR sheets did not record receipt of the amount of medication into the home. There were gaps in the recording of several other prescribed medications. As a result it was not possible to ensure that the residents had received the required medication and this could place residents health at risk. Some medication that had been prescribed by the GP to be administered on a daily basis had been amended on the MAR sheets to be given every third day. There was no reference in care notes or updated information from the GP on record to indicate why this decision had been made. The nurse spoken to was unable to provide clear information as to who had made this decision and why. Again this could result in the health care needs of the resident not being met. On two of the units there was an excess stock of medication and medication that was not being used in order of use by dates. Medication with a ‘limited’ life once opened did not have the dates of when it was opened. This could result in medication that has exceeded the ‘shelf life’ being administered to residents’. Medication must be clearly labelled when it has been opened. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Discussion with resident’s indicated that most felt that they were treated with dignity and respect by staff. However, during the inspection the inspector observed a lack of privacy and dignity for one resident. This was raised with the manager at the time of the inspection. It is important that all residents are treated with dignity and respect at all times by staff at the home. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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): 12,13, 14 & 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service Activities were provided and residents were able to maintain contact with family and friends. Residents were able to exercise choice and control over their lives and the residents enjoy the meals that they choose. EVIDENCE: The home had two designated activities coordinator posts one part time and one full time. At the time of the site visit to the home one post was currently vacant although recruitment for this post was ongoing. Details regarding activities were displayed in the main entrance and on each individual unit. Further development of the activities programmes must be considered to ensure that appropriate activities are offered to meet the cultural needs of all residents living at the home. The manager said that residents’ meetings had been arranged but there had been a poor response. The manager said that Southern Cross had a specific format on which to record activities as part of the overall individual care plan. There was evidence on some of the files that this document was in place however not all care files contained this information and of those that did not all had been fully completed. Residents’ spoken to said that there were some activities available and there had been several social events that had been very enjoyable. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The home had an open visiting policy and visitors could be received in the residents’ own room or any of the communal areas of the home. Residents spoken to during the inspection confirmed this. Following the previous inspection the manager said that the catering staff had reviewed the meals provided at the home and a menu was displayed on the notice board. It was noted that the menu still contained information relating to the previous home owners – Ashbourne Care and not Southern Cross Healthcare. It is strongly recommended that the home is consistent with the information relating to who is the homeowner to avoid any confusion for residents and their relatives, friends etc. Residents spoken to said that the meals were generally nice and a choice was available. The manager said that a variety of diets were catered for to meet dietary and cultural needs of the residents. One resident commented that there was “ always plenty of food available”. Other residents spoken to said that the food was nice and a choice was available at all times. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service The home had the systems and procedures in place that allowed people to express their complaints and concerns however, residents were not fully protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: The home had a complaints policy and procedure that was displayed on the main notice board and in the Service Users’ Guide. Residents spoken to said that they were aware of how to make a complaint and felt confident that concerns would be acted upon. The home had policies and procedures in place for the Protection of Vulnerable Adults and the manager had a copy of the ‘No Secrets’ guidance including the Manchester Multi Agency procedure. Although the manager was able to demonstrate a good understanding of the procedure staff spoken to were not clear on some areas of the procedure to follow should an allegation be made. It is important that all staff are aware of the action to take to ensure that the health and safety of the resident is protected and promoted at all times. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 & 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service The premises were generally clean and comfortable for the residents living there. EVIDENCE: The reception area of the home was warm and welcoming. There were seating areas available and refreshments available for visitors and residents. The premises were found to generally clean and tidy and there had been planned maintenance and redecoration undertaken. There were still areas of the home that required additional redecoration due to a recent water leak and also signs of wear and tear especially where wheelchairs footplates had caught on walls and doors. This gave a poor impression to anyone visiting the home. Lounge areas viewed were appropriately furnished, warm and comfortable. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Residents were encouraged and supported to personalise their own bedrooms and this was evident in the rooms viewed during the visit to the home. Residents’ spoken to said that they were happy with the standard of their personal accommodation and confirmed that they were supported to make their bedrooms feel ‘homely’. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service The number and deployment of staff available appeared sufficient to meet the residents’ assessed needs. However, the home was unable to demonstrate that its staff had completed all the required training to meet resident’s needs. The procedures for recruiting staff were robust and provided adequate safeguards to protect residents. EVIDENCE: On the day of the visit the home appeared to have an appropriate number of suitable staff on duty to meet the needs of the residents at the home. Some staff and residents spoken to said that on occasions there were not enough staff available. A selection of staffing rotas were examined and it appeared that the appropriate number of staff were on duty. The manager said that she was able to alter the rota in accordance with the needs of the residents and would continue to monitor the staffing levels. All staff had an individual training file to record all training undertaken. In addition to this the manager maintained a training matrix to identify the training undertaken and when updated training was required. The manager said that the training programme had not been fully maintained due to the care coordinator who provided some of the training moving to another home Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 belonging to the company. The manager said that 70 – 80 of training was up to date and some external training had been arranged to take place within the next few weeks. Some staff had not undertaken Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) training and although this had been identified a date had not been arranged for this. Files for 4 staff were examined and found to contain the appropriate information required although evidence of supervision for some staff was not available on their file. The manager was aware of this and was able to provide dates of planned supervision with staff. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service The home had the systems in place to monitor the service based on peoples views. Systems and procedures were in place, which safeguarded and protected residents’ financial interests and in the main the home was seen to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents and staff. EVIDENCE: The home had a general manager who was responsible for the management of the home and the service provided. At the time of the site the care coordinator who had been appointed to support the general manager had transferred within the company to another home and this post was currently vacant. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 The manager was able to demonstrate a clear understanding of the aims and objectives of the home and how these were monitored. Regular questionnaires were distributed to residents and their family/friends and representatives to establish their views on the services provided by the home. The manager was able to demonstrate how the views expressed were then acted upon in order to promote the wishes of the residents. There was evidence that residents meetings were held although the manager said that attendance at the meetings were limited. To try to address the poor attendance the manager had arranged meetings at different times including weekends. Evidence was seen that the systems in place did safeguard resident’s financial interests and secure facilities were provided for any money or valuables held on behalf of residents. A discussion was held with the manager regarding appropriate levels of finances being held for residents. The home ensured that the required regular servicing of equipment and installations such as gas was undertaken to safe guard residents. Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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 2 8 2 9 2 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 2 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 OP7 Regulation 14 Requirement All care plans in the home must include information on how residents needs will be met The residents’ plan of care must set out in detail the actions which need to be taken by staff to ensure that all aspects of health, personal and social care needs are met. The Registered Person must make arrangements for the recording, handling, safekeeping and safe administration of medicines which are detailed below: • All prescribed medication must be signed for by the person administrating them at the time of administration. All medication records must be accurate All medication must be administered as prescribed. Version 5.2 Page 25 Timescale for action 01/01/07 2 OP7 15 01/01/07 3 OP9 13 30/11/06 • • Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc 5 OP30 18 Staff must receive ongoing training on a to ensure that they have the necessary skills to promote and maintain the health and well being of the residents within the home. 30/11/06 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 OP28 Good Practice Recommendations The Responsible Individual should continue to take steps to ensure that at least 50 of carers have at least NVQ level 2. It is recommended that the daily statement of health contain more detail to accurately reflect the nursing care provided on a day to day basis. It is recommended that the activity sheets are kept up to date and the activity co-ordinator keeps an accurate record of her consultations with the residents. It is recommended that the quality audit questionnaire also be sent to visiting professionals in order to gain their view of the service being delivered It is strongly recommended that the home is consistent with the information relating to who is the homeowner to avoid any confusion for residents and their relatives, friends etc. It is recommended that evidence must be provided that all staff have received Protection of Vulnerable Adult training which includes the actions to be taken in the event of an allegation of abuse. 2 3 4 5 OP7 OP12 OP33 OP1 6 OP18 Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Laurel Court Nursing Home DS0000021556.V303932.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!