Inspection on 25/07/05 for Life Care Home

This inspection was carried out on 25th July 2005.

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.

Other inspections for this house

Life Care Home 30/10/07

Life Care Home 27/04/06

Life Care Home 15/11/05

Life Care Home 25/05/05

Life Care Home 19/01/05

Life Care Home 13/05/04

Similar services:

St Vincents

The Cotswold Home

Newbeech House

Winton House

Rush Court

Hillyfield Rest Home

The Maypole Nursing Centre

The Briars

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE LIFECARE 31 Cressingham Road Reading Berks RG2 2RY Lead Inspector Kerry Kingston Unannounced 25 July 2005, 10:00 am 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 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. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Lifecare Address 31 Cressingham Road, Reading, Berks RG2 7RU Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 1008 9866371 Mr S S Ahluwalia Care Home (CRH) 16 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (OP) of places LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. That provision is made for one service user under 65 years of age, identified in the application form dated 21.2.05, to be resident in the home. Date of last inspection 25 May 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Lifecare is a residential home providing accomodation and personal care for sixteen older peole, of both sexes. The home is situated in a residential area a few miles from Reading Town Centre.There are klocal amenities and the home is on a public transport route.There are five ground floor and nine first floor bedrooms,accessed by a lift. One ground floor room has en-suite facilities and one of the first floor bedrooms is a double room. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspected which took place between the hours of 10am and 4.30pm, it was conducted in response to a complaint received by the Commission. The last inspection took place on May 25th 2005, the report had not become public at the time of this inspection. The inspector spent some time with a carer, who was the senior on duty, a manager who came from another care home owned by the same provider, several residents and one visitor to the home (a family member). The inspector looked at some records, observed lunch and looked at food stocks and the grounds of the building. The inspector, partially, feedback to the provider, via the telephone. The home does not have a registered manager, currently. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The home could make sure that care plans have more details in them, so that the staff can get to know the residents and all their needs much more quickly. There should be a better way of showing how many complaints have been made and if the home is listening to what the residents are saying. There could be a better way of recording activities done by residents so that staff can see who is joining in and who isn’t. The home should provide more interesting and better quality food to make sure that residents enjoy their food and stay as healthy as possible. The home should make sure that all staff know what is going on in the home and talk to each other to make sure they can keep residents informed of what is happening in their home. The home must make sure that residents have the right equipment to help them and that staff know how to use it properly. Residents money could be recorded properly to make sure that it is clear where their money has been spent and what it has been spent on. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 6 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. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 3 Service users have an assessment prior to admission. EVIDENCE: The two most recently admitted service users have a care management and residential assessment, identifying any areas of concern or risk. The home does an additional residential assessment, which also identifies issues and problems. The assessments are adequate but include little history and few strategies to deal with any issues identified. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 9 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 standard(s) 7 and 8 All service users have an individual plan of care and their health needs appear to be met. EVIDENCE: Several service user plans were seen, these were developed on admission and reviewed one to two monthly by staff. Some plans contained little detail with regard to strategies for dealing with problems/issues (see standard 3) and some health care plans were not evident. Some plans did not have up-to-date weight records or pressure sore assessments. The inspector could not locate any annual reviews of care. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 10 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 standard(s) 12 and 15 It is not clear what activities and leisure pursuits take place. Service users do not receive an appealing diet. EVIDENCE: There is a generic activity plan displayed but no recording withy regard to who participated and if the activities actually happened. On the day of inspection the activity displayed did not take place. Some activities are recorded in individuals’ files but not the planned specific activities. None of the service users access external activities. The inspector observed lunchtime and saw food that was presented poorly and looked unappetising. Of the six service users using the dining room, three left their meal. One lady made no comment but pulled a face and left the table, two ladies told me the food was awful and they could not eat it. One of the ladies who ate her meal said that it is not very good but she makes the best of it, as she is hungry at meal times. The two other ladies made no comment but ate all their food. Service users were not offered a choice and staff did not interact with them at all. No one asked why the ladies had not eaten or offered an alternative. The second course served looked much more appetising and was eaten by five of the six service users. Drinks were served in plastic beakers, which also caused negative comments from the ladies. The inspector looked at menus, which were repeated every week and did not reflect what was offered on the day of inspection. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 There was no fresh produce available, the inspector was advised that frozen vegetables contain the same nutritional value. However there was no fresh fruit, no salad stuffs, mushrooms or fresh vegetable for variety or to improve the taste of food. The beef stew and chicken casserole included on the menu was available in tins of a value brand. Staff confirmed that fresh food was not generally available. One service user spoken to buys her own fruit and cereals. Only two varieties of cereals were available i.e. porridge and cornflakes, three service users said that the cornflakes were not good quality and they would like more choice. Service users informed the inspector that they used to have a choice but this no longer happens. The home does not have a cook and meals are prepared by care staff. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 12 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 standard(s) 16 and 18 Service users and their relatives are not confident that their complaints will be acted upon. Service users are, generally, protected. EVIDENCE: Three service users told the inspector that they had made several complaints about the standard of food but these had not been acted upon, the complaints book did not reflect these complaints. One relative said that no action had been taken about several complaints that she had made, there were no detailed reports of these complaints although there was some supporting paperwork that showed that there had been some action around these complaints. Most staff have been trained in the Protection of Vulnerable Adults and the home has an inter agency Vulnerable Adults Procedure displayed. The home cares for some residents monies and this is not properly recorded, the cash amounts were correct (on those checked) but it was not possible for the inspector to ‘track’ expenditure (see standard 35). LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 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 standard(s) None of the above standards were assessed at this inspection. EVIDENCE: LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 14 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 considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 30 Staff have opportunities to participate in training to ensure they are able to do their work. EVIDENCE: The home has recently had an external training needs assessment, which included individuals, as well as he home, although the written confirmation of this had not yet been received by the home. Nine of the staff have received core training and the other five have dates to access the Local Authority Training being offered in the area. Training opportunities have been significantly increased in the last year, and the manger of the other home (owned by the proprietor) has worked hard to gain access to relevant training courses. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 15 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 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 32,35 and 38 The home does not have a registered manager. Service users finances are not safeguarded. The Health and Safety of service users is generally, promoted. EVIDENCE: The home does not have a registered manager and staff have no knowledge of the current situation. The person who as been managing the home is currently absent and the staff spoken to were not able to say when she would be returning. A carer, who had not completed her N.V.Q.2 training, was the senior staff member of duty at the time of inspection. The home looks after the money for six service users and there was not a detailed recording system, in evidence. The cash checked was correct but there was no simple way of verifying income and expenditure via the recording system that was in place. Staff have been trained in Health and Safety issues and records are up-todate. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 16 Service users, however, do not have O.T. assessments for the disability equipment that is being used and there was an issue around whether it was being used properly. Five staff had trained in using the hoists but five were waiting to be trained. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 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 ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score x x 3 x x x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 x 10 x 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 x 14 x 15 1 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION x x x x x x x x STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 x 29 x 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 1 x 3 x 2 x x 2 x x 2 LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 no Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard 8 Regulation 12.1 Requirement To ensure the assessment, identification and recording of health matters, including pressure sores and nutritional status. To provide adequate quantities of suitable,wholesome and nutriotious food, which is varied and properly prepared. To ensure that complaints are properly recorded and acted upon. To improve communiaction with staff and to plan for the appointment a registered manager. To ensure a robust system of recording service users finances is developed. To make suitable arrangements to provide a safe system for moving and handling service users. This to include individual O.T. and risk assessemts and effective staff training, in the jse of specialist equipment. Timescale for action 01.10.05 2. 15 27 16.2(i) 01.09.05 3. 4. 16 32 22 12.5 01.11.05 01.09.05 5. 6. 35 38 13.6 13.5 01.10.05 01.09.05 LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 19 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. 2. 3. Refer to Standard 3 7 12 Good Practice Recommendations To include more detail in the service users daily living plan. To include more detail of action which needs to be taken to ensure that all aspects of health,personal and social care needs are met. To keep more detailed records of activitries participated in by individuals. LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 Commission for Social Care Inspection 2nd Floor 1015 Arlington Business Park Theale Berks RG7 4SA 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 LIFECARE H51-H01-S11253-Lifecare-V241182-250705Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 21 - 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!