Inspection on 04/08/06 for Lee House

This inspection was carried out on 4th August 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 there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Lee House 11/03/06

Lee House 02/11/05

Lee House 14/03/05

Lee House 14/06/04

Lee House 04/02/04

Lee House 11/11/03

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Lee House Longley Lane Northenden Manchester M22 4HT Lead Inspector Sarah Oldham Key Unannounced Inspection 4th August 2006 11:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Lee House Address Longley Lane Northenden Manchester M22 4HT 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 945 5204 0161 945 7635 www.harvesthousing.org.uk Manchester and District Housing Association Jacquelyn Shaikh Care Home 25 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (25) of places Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 11th March 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Lee House is a care home providing personal care and accommodation for 25 older people (65 and over). The home is owned by Manchester and District Housing Association and is a member of Harvest Housing Group. The home was opened in 1986. The home is located in the town of Northenden, close to shops, pubs, a post office and other amenities. The home consists of a purpose built two-storey building that stands in its own grounds, surrounded by mature trees to the rear of the property. There are parking facilities at the front of the home. All of the bedrooms are single and 18 of the rooms have en-suite facilities. There are adequate toilet, bathroom and shower facilities. The home has two lounges/dining areas, a treatment room and a self-service kitchen for use by the residents and their relatives. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection of Lee House included an unannounced key site visit. An inspector carried out the site visit on Friday the 4 August 2006. The visit lasted 5 hours. The home was not told about the visit beforehand. The inspection also included time spent speaking to residents’, members of staff, the manager of the home and relatives. Documentation including staff files, records and other relevant information was examined. Information was also obtained from records held on file at the office of the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI). A pre inspection questionnaire was sent to the home prior to the visit and was returned to CSCI on the 2 August 2006. The manager had completed this. Residents were sent a survey questionnaire asking them what they thought about the home. Ten of the questionnaires were returned before the unannounced visit to the home. The views of the residents’ have been included in this report as well as the views of the residents’ spoken to during the visit. The home had followed up two of the three requirements made at the previous inspection in March 2006. Each section of this report contains a judgement about the quality of the service provided. In making the judgement the inspector has considered the information available, this included the site visit and information from residents and staff. The current scales of charges are £373.54 - £378.54. In addition to this there is a £25.00 top up fee. What the service does well: The home provides a homely environment to the residents. Residents spoken to and those that completed a questionnaire said that the home was comfortable and staff were supportive and friendly. Comments made during the site visit included “ I feel that I have lived here for ages. The staff are really nice and nothing is too much trouble for them. My health has improved since I moved here and that is due to the care I receive”. The atmosphere in the home was warm and welcoming. Visitors to the home said that they were made to feel welcome and that they were kept informed of their relatives health and care. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Staff received training and support to undertake their role to provide the care to the residents. 79 of the staff had National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ) level 2 or above and the home had identified additional NVQ training for staff. Prospective residents are provided with information about the home and are invited to visit prior to making a decision to move in. The manager or deputy manager visits prospective residents to discuss their individual needs to ensure that the home is able to meet those needs. One resident spoken to said “the manager came to see me before I moved in and told me all about the home”. Residents feel that they are involved in the decisions that affect their lives including social activities, meals and what they wish to do. Residents meetings are held as well as individual discussions with residents to enable these views to be made. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The manager undertakes a pre admission assessment to ensure that the home is able to meet the needs of each individual resident. However, these assessments contain very basic information and were not kept on all the individual files. Care plans had been developed for most of the residents, however one file viewed as part of the inspection did not contain a care plan or pre admission assessment. This could have resulted in the resident not receiving the care and support they needed, especially if they were unable to explain to the care staff their needs. The care plans in place were reviewed, however, some of these reviews were not completed on a monthly basis. It is important that the care needs of an individual are reviewed and any changes clearly recorded to ensure that staff providing the care and support are aware of the changes. This was discussed with the manager during the site visit. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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 Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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): 1,3 & 6 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. All potential residents have all the information they require to make an informed choice about where to live. Assessments are undertaken to ensure that the home has the appropriate facilities to meet the needs of the prospective resident. EVIDENCE: The home had a Statement of Purpose and a Service Users’ Guide that included details regarding the admission process to the home. These documents were available to all residents. All residents admitted to the home had an assessment undertaken by a Care Manager. This detailed the needs of the individual. The home maintained these assessments on the individual residents’ file. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 The manager said that a pre admission assessment is undertaken. This was to ensure that the home has the appropriate facilities to meet the potential residents’ needs. Copies of these pre admission assessments were seen during the site visit. Some of the assessments contained limited information and it was recommended to the manager that the format be reviewed to enable a more comprehensive pre admission assessment to be undertaken. Residents spoken to said that they had their needs assessed prior to them moving into the home. One resident said “ the manager came to see me where I was living previously to tell me about the home and to see if it was the right home for me”. The home does not provide intermediate care. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. The individual health and personal care needs of the residents living in the home were met in accordance with their assessed needs, however some care plans were not completed and some reviews were overdue. This could impact on the care and support that the resident requires. EVIDENCE: The care files of four residents were viewed during the visit to the home. The home had clear care planning documentation that contained details of an individuals needs and how these needs were to be met. Three of the files viewed contained this documentation and was recorded clearly. However, one of the files viewed for a resident admitted three months ago did not have any details regarding the residents care needs and how these would be met. The residents care management assessment identified that the resident had a number of complex needs. Due to the lack of care plan it was unclear how the residents needs were identified to the staff providing care and how the needs would be met. This placed the resident at risk of having incorrect care and Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 support provided by staff. This was discussed with the manager during the inspection. The manager said that staff had been made aware of the residents’ needs in staff briefings and had thought that there was a care plan in place. Three other care plans were viewed and found to contain information that identified individual needs and how they would be met. The inspector spoke with the residents’ whose care plans had been viewed. The residents confirmed that they were happy with the level of care that they received and felt that the staff supported them in an appropriate manner. One resident who had recently moved to the home said, “ I feel that I have lived here for ages. The staff are really nice and nothing is too much trouble for them. My health has improved since I moved here and that is due to the care I receive”. Reviews had been held to ensure that the needs of the resident were monitored and any changes to individual needs were recorded. The timescale of reviews held varied and some care plans had been reviewed over three months previously. Care plans must be reviewed on a monthly basis to ensure that any change of needs have been clearly identified and recorded on the individual care plan. The home maintained records regarding any medical intervention and involvement of health care professionals to ensure that the residents’ health care needs were supported. During the inspection a GP was visiting a resident following the request for a home visit. Details of this visit were recorded on the individuals care file and the outcome of the visit. Residents were supported to attend health care appointments by staff members if family or friends were unable to do so. Following the previous inspection the manager had contacted the pharmacist and requested that medication that came in an outer packaging was labelled on the actual container. A number of containers were inspected and found to be appropriately labelled. The manager said that she did not accept medication that was not labelled and this was standard practice by the seniors responsible for medication. Residents who are assessed as capable of administering their own medication are supplied with a cabinet to safely store their medication. However, all the current residents have their medication administered by the senior care staff that has been appropriately trained. Following the previous inspection when it was suggested that all residents in receipt of medication sign a ‘Medication Declaration’ form outlining their preference as to how medication is administered. The manager has ensured that this has been undertaken and details maintained on individual care files. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 A number of residents spoke with the inspector and 10 questionnaire forms were returned to the office. All confirmed that they felt that they were treated with dignity and respect by staff. Staff were also observed supporting and interacting with the residents in a respectful and supportive manner. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents have choice and support to meet their expectations and preferences regarding their daily lifestyle and they were able to maintain contact with their relatives and friends who are made welcome to the home. The home provides nutritious and appropriate healthy meals to residents’ satisfaction. EVIDENCE: The home provided planned activities on four days of the week. On the day of the site visit an external entertainer had been booked and the majority of residents were able to join in with a sing-a-long. A number of residents were spoken to by the inspector and said that they were consulted about the activities that took place within the home. One resident who had lived at the home for a number of years said, “ I really enjoy living here and there is something going on most of the time”. Another resident said “ I feel well looked after by the staff and there is always lots going on. I am also able to go out and about with friends and family as well”. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The manager said that residents meetings were held on a regular basis to ensure that residents were able to be involved in planning activities, menus, outings and other aspects relating to the home. During the site visit a number of visitors came to the home. They were seen to be made welcome by staff. Two visitors spoken to said that they were confident that the care and support that their relative received was of a high standard. They also said that they felt welcome when they came to the home and were kept aware of any changes to their relatives care needs. One visitor said, “The staff always keep me informed of how my mother is. I feel happy with the care and support that she receives”. All residents spoken to and those that returned questionnaires to the Commission said that the food was good and there was always a choice of menu. One resident said, “The food is lovely. There is always a choice and during the hot weather we have had lots of additional drinks, fruit and ice cream to help keep cool”. There is a menu board on the main corridor of the home ensuring residents are aware of the days choice of lunch and tea. There is also a snack/drinks making area on the first floor that residents could use if they choose or are assessed as being able to prepare beverages without calculated risks. The catering staff were aware of specialist diets for individual residents and ensured that they met these needs. In addition to this they had a list of residents likes and dislikes regarding food and were able to provide alternatives to the choices on the menus if required. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents’ were aware of how and to whom to make a complaint. Staff had received relevant training to support and assist them to keep residents safe. EVIDENCE: Details of how to make a complaint were detailed in the Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide. Residents spoken to said that they were aware of what to do if they wished to make a complaint. All those spoken to felt that if they made a complaint it would be acted upon. One resident said, “I have never had to make a complaint but if I had any worries or concerns then I would speak to the manager or my relative”. The management and staff at Lee House see protecting people from abuse as extremely important. The policies and procedures are in line with the Department of Health guidance ‘No secrets’. A number of staff had received training regarding the Protection of Vulnerable Adults and were able to demonstrate an understanding of the procedure to follow should an allegation be made. The Protection of Vulnerable Adults formed part of the core training for staff and was updated on a regular basis to ensure that staff were fully aware of the need to promote and protect the needs of vulnerable people. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The home had robust policies and procedures in place for the recruitment and selection of staff. The manager and deputy manager had recently attended training regarding Criminal Record Bureau requirements and were able to demonstrate a good understanding of the importance of ensuring that the appropriate checks were completed prior to staff commencing employment at the home. A number of staff files were viewed and found to contain information as required under Schedule 2 of the Care Home Regulations 2001. This included application forms, references proof of identity and details of Criminal Record Bureau enhanced disclosure numbers obtained for individual staff. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. The residents at Lee House are happy, and live in safe and comfortable surroundings. The home was clean and free from odours and a planned programme of maintenance and decoration was in place. EVIDENCE: The home is on two levels with 25 bedrooms, 18 of which have en suite facilities. Some bedrooms are carpeted. However, some rooms were fitted with none slip and none porous floor covering to suit the individual resident. The manager said that the choice of flooring was discussed with each individual resident and if they wished to have carpeting to their room this could be arranged. The manager also said that she had been looking at a number of Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 different types of floor coverings that were serviceable and provided a homely feel. The home was decorated to a reasonable standard and the manager said that there was an ongoing routine maintenance programme and decoration of the premises was planned. The chairs in the lounge were also due to be replaced to provide a more homely and comfortable lounge for the residents. Some comments received by the Commission from the questionnaires sent out indicated that although the home was clean there were areas that needed some redecoration to paintwork. As previously mentioned this was being addressed as part of the planned redecoration. Residents spoken to said that they felt that the home was clean and pleasantly decorated. One resident said, “the lounge and dining room are really nice and bright”. Another resident said, “My bedroom is really lovely and decorated just how I like it. I was able to choose the colour scheme and I have got all my things in it. I am really comfortable here”. The home was clean and free from any unpleasant odours. Comments received from residents and relatives were complementary about the standard of cleanliness and hygiene. The laundry had the appropriate facilities to clean linen and control the risk of cross infection. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. The home’s recruitment and training policies and procedures provide support to enable sufficient well-trained staff to be employed in the home. EVIDENCE: At the time of the site visit the staffing levels were appropriate to meet the needs of the number of residents at the home. A selection of staff rotas had been forwarded to the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) prior to the site visit. These evidenced that staffing levels were reviewed in accordance with the needs of the residents and were maintained at an appropriate level in order to meet those needs. Information received from the manager indicated that 79 of staff held a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) at level 2 or above. Further NVQ level 2 and 3 was planned in the near future. The manager and assistant manager have achieved National Vocational Qualification level 4. In addition to this, the manager has obtained the Registered Managers Award. All new staff to the home undertook induction training in accordance with the Skills for Care council training. Staff spoken to say that they had received induction training. In addition to this training staff had also participated in Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 other training such as the Protection of Vulnerable Adults, Moving and Handling, Medication, Health and Safety and Basic Food Hygiene. Details of training were recorded on a staff training files. Staff recruited to work at the home were recruited in accordance with the home’s recruitment and selection policies and procedures. A total of four files were inspected and contained information as required under Schedule 2 of the Care Home Regulations 2001. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 The quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using the available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents at the home benefit from a manager who has the management skills to provide a quality service that enables residents to voice their opinions and views about the service that they receive. EVIDENCE: The registered manager had the appropriate qualifications to manage the home. Throughout the site visit to the home the manager was able to provide clear information regarding the home and its aims and objectives. The manager had a good understanding of the needs of the residents and was observed to respond appropriately to them treating them with dignity and respect. Residents spoken to were complimentary of the manager and staff. One resident said, “ the manager and staff are all helpful”. Nothing is too much Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 trouble”. Another resident said, “it is really nice here. Staff are really friendly and I am really happy here”. Information received from the manager said the home did not act as appointee for any of the residents regarding management of their financial affairs. Family members supported residents with their finances. The home maintained a record of any monies held on behalf of residents and maintained a balance sheet of all monies received and issued for individual residents. Receipts for individual items were maintained with the individual residents financial record. During the site visit a number of files relating to health and safety working practices were viewed, these included the fire procedures and records maintained. The records were found to be in order and current with appropriate measures taken to protect and safeguard residents’ health and safety. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 3 X 3 X X 3 HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 4 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X 3 X Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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. 1. Standard OP7 Regulation 15(1) Requirement The service provider must ensure each resident has a plan of care outlining his or her needs and wishes.(previous timescale of 14/04/06 not met) Timescale for action 30/09/06 2 OP7 15(2)(a) The care plan must be reviewed at least once a month and updated to reflect changing need for health and personal care. 30/09/06 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 OP3 Good Practice Recommendations The pre admission assessment should contain greater detail to ensure that all the needs of the prospective resident have been identified. Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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 Lee House DS0000021557.V303957.R02.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!