Inspection on 30/10/07 for Longworth House

This inspection was carried out on 30th October 2007.

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

Longworth House 22/08/06

Longworth House 21/03/06

Longworth House 17/06/05

Longworth House 03/12/04

Longworth House 16/06/04

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 Longworth House Higher Ramsgreave Road Ramsgreave Blackburn Lancashire BB1 9DJ Lead Inspector Mrs Janet Proctor Unannounced Inspection 30th October 2007 09:20 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 Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Longworth House Address Higher Ramsgreave Road Ramsgreave Blackburn Lancashire BB1 9DJ 01254 812283 Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Mrs Julie Elizabeth Hayes Mr Steven Michael Hayes Vacant Post xxxx Care Home 28 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (3), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (28) of places Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The service should employ a suitably qualified manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The home is registered for a maximum of 28 service users to include: Up to 25 service users in the category of OP (over 65 years of age, not falling within any other category) 3 named service users within the category of DE(E) (Dementia over 65 years of age). Date of last inspection 22nd August 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Longworth House is registered to provide personal care to 28 people from the age of 65 years plus. Three of these service user are also suffering from dementia. The registered persons are Mrs Julie Elizabeth Hayes and Mr Steven Michael Hayes. Mr Hayes undertakes the day-to-day management of the home. Longworth House is situated in a rural location, between Ramsgreave and Mellor, with general amenities being available in Brownhills, which is 5 minutes away by car or bus. More extensive facilities can be located in the local town of Blackburn, which is approximately 3 miles from the home. The property is detached, and stands in its own extensive, established and well-maintained grounds, with a panoramic view of the Ribble Valley from the back garden. Prospective residents receive a brochure that has all the details necessary for them to make a decision about whether the home would be suitable for them. The fees charged at the time of the inspection ranged from: £332-00 per week to £374-00 per week. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. A key unannounced inspection, which included a visit to the home, was conducted at Longworth House on the 30th October 2007 . No additional visits have been made since the previous inspection. On the day of the inspection there were 26 residents at the home. Prior to the visit the Registered Person had submitted information in a preinspection questionnaire. This gave information that was used in the planning of the inspection. Surveys were sent out and were returned by 4 residents and 9 relatives. On the day of the inspection information was obtained from staff records, care records, and policies and procedures. Information was also got from talking to residents, the Manager and deputy, and staff members. A tour of the building took place. An ‘Expert by Experience accompanied the Inspector on this visit. The purpose of their visit was to help the Inspector get a picture of what it is like to live in the home. Wherever possible the views of residents were obtained about their life at the home and their comments are included in the report. What the service does well: The manager and deputy manager ensured that residents were assessed before they came to live at the home. This meant that the staff at the home knew what care they needed. The resident received a letter telling them their needs could be met. This letter was ‘warm’ and ‘friendly’ in its tone and made a pleasant start to the relationship between the prospective resident and the staff at the home. There were good relationships between residents and staff and a friendly atmosphere at the home. Staff were seen to treat residents in a kind, considerate and patient manner. Residents spoken to were very complimentary about the staff. Residents said, “It’s marvellous, I can’t fault it”, “We’ve not been here long. The staff are all very nice and have made us feel at home. They are looking after us very well” and “The girls’ are smashing. They look after us all very well.” The relative surveys also indicated that there were good relationships between them and the staff. Some of the comments included, “They are always very helpful, cheerful and very caring with the residents” and “A pleasure to visit. The atmosphere is warm and friendly. The staff are welcoming and the residents are happy and cared for.” The daily routines were flexible and allowed residents to make choices about how they spent their day. A resident said, “I can make decisions about when I Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 get up and go to bed. I just tell them and they help me up in the lift. I go to my bedroom when I want to.” A nutritious and balanced diet was provided. Residents were happy with the food served at the home. Residents said, “ The food is very good. Tasty and plenty of it” and “I like the food.” Three of the resident surveys returned said that they usually liked the meals at the home and one said they always did. The accommodation was very clean and well maintained with homely furnishings and fittings. Residents were happy with the accommodation provided. A resident said, “It’s a nice room, it’s got everything I need.” The number of carers with the National Vocational Qualification in care was above 50 . This meant that a large number of staff had knowledge about how to provide care for residents. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 The care plans should tell staff exactly what they must do for the resident so that they know what care to give. The review of the care plan should make a statement to show what progress has been made during the month so that it can be seen whether the care is effective or not. The care plan should be written with the input of the resident or relative if possible and then kept under review. This is so that residents have some say in what care they receive and the information in the plan is current and accurate. All residents must be moved in a safe way so that they, or staff, are not injured. Residents who self-medicate must keep their medications in a secure place so that no one else can get hold of them. When packets of tablets are opened they should be dated so that it can be easily seen if the right amount of medication has been given. The medications for return should be entered into the record book as and when they were no longer needed so that it is apparent if any are mislaid. Staff must ensure that they wear disposable aprons and gloves when doing care duties so that the potential for cross infection is controlled. In order to ensure continued protection of residents all staff must receive regular training in the protection of vulnerable adults and be aware of whom to contact should such an incident occur. All new staff must have thorough induction training. Training for all staff must cover health and safety, moving and handling and basic food hygiene. This is in order to ensure that all staff are competent to do their work and to protect residents and staff. There must be quality assurance systems so that the home can monitor its own performance. This is so that the Manager can identify areas that need attention and create an action plan to resolve these. 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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 Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 and 6. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents could be confident that the home could meet their needs. This was because they had their needs assessed before moving into the home and received a letter confirming whether the home could meet these needs. EVIDENCE: From the residents files viewed it was evident that a pre-admission assessment had been completed by the Deputy Manager before they moved into the home. She then made a decision about whether there was sufficient staff, equipment and other resources at the home to meet the needs of the prospective resident. Once this decision was made she wrote a letter to the prospective resident confirming that their needs could be met. Residents spoken to said that they were happy living at the home. All of the resident surveys said that they had received enough information before they moved in so they could decide if it was the right place for them. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Intermediate care not done at Longworth House Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The care plans identified residents’ needs and told staff how to meet these. The medication practices protected the health of residents. Residents were treated with respect and care was given in private. EVIDENCE: Each resident had an individualised care plan. This identified the health, personal and social care needs and told staff what they had to do to meet these. The information is the plan was personalised and stressed the individual needs and strengths of the resident. Some of the plans could be more precise in what they told staff to do. For example a plan identified that a resident became breathless on exertion but did not say what to do when this occurred. The plans were reviewed monthly. The review sheet did not give an indication of the progress made during the month, so it could not be seen whether the care given was effective or not. Relatives were involved in the initial care planning process but there was no evidence that they read and agreed to any amendments to the care plan. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Health assessments were done for: moving and handling; risk of falls; pressure sore development; and nutrition. These are important as they identify risks to the resident’s health before a problem actually occurs and enables appropriate action to be taken. Staff were seen to use the ‘underarm’ lift when transferring residents. This is unsafe as there is a danger of dislocation to the shoulder or damage to the nerve in the arm. Residents had access to health professionals. These included GPs, District Nurses, chiropodists and opticians. All of the resident surveys said that they received the care and support they needed. Three said they always received the medical support that they needed and one said they usually did. Five of the relative surveys returned said that the care home always met the needs of their relative and four said it usually did. Two of the relative surveys returned said that there could be better communication from staff about GP visits and other issues affecting their relative. There were some aspects of good practice in respect of medications. Each plan of care examined had a declaration signed from the resident about whether they wished the home to take control of their medications. There was also a list of the residents’ current medication, when it was to be taken and what side effects there were. Patient information leaflets were available so staff and residents could look up information. There was a signature list of staff who gave medication and a photograph of the resident for identification purposes. The policies and procedures for staff to follow about the control of medications had been revised and now told staff exactly what the procedure was at Longworth House so they knew what was expected of them. The medications and Controlled Drugs were stored securely. The records of Controlled Drugs were checked against the medications and found to be correct. The book in which they were recorded had numbered pages. There was a record of the temperature of the storage cupboard. Records were kept of medications ordered, received, administered and returned to the Community Pharmacy. When packets of tablets are opened it is advisable to date these so that it can be easily seen if the right amount of medication has been given. The medications for return were not entered into the record book as and when they were no longer needed. This meant that some could be mislaid and staff would not necessarily be aware of this. One resident was self-administering his medications. He had been assessed as being competent to do so. These medications were seen on the windowsill of his bedroom. As the room was not locked there was the potential that someone could enter the room and take the medications. Residents were treated with respect. All care was observed to be given in private. There was screening in the double rooms. Residents could use the cordless phone for private telephone calls. Their preferred term of address was Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 noted in the care plan. Residents spoke to said the staff were very kind and looked after them very well. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents were able to make choices about their life at the home so that their lifestyle met their preferences. Resident’s social, cultural and recreational needs were met through links with their family and friends being maintained and opportunities to undertake activities within the home. The meals offered at the home were good and ensured that the individual dietary needs of residents were met. EVIDENCE: The social interests of residents were noted in their plan of care and were discussed at the residents meetings. There was a programme of daily activities on display in the office and staff said that they did these with the residents. One of the resident surveys returned said that there were usually activities they could take part in, one said there was sometimes and one said never. One did not respond. The Expert By Experience spent several hours chatting with residents about their life at the home. She was told by several that they did not want to join in activities and were quite happy entertaining themselves. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The daily routines were flexible. Residents could choose when they got up and went to bed. They could use their rooms as and when they wished. They could have their meals in their rooms if they wished to. Visitors were welcome and residents could see these in their room if they wished. Six of the relative surveys returned said that the care home always helped their friend or relative to keep in touch and one said it usually did. There was a five-week rota of menus. The day’s menu was displayed on a board in the hallway so that residents knew what was for the meals. Alternatives to the menu were available. Records were kept of any food choice other than what was on the menu. Drinks were served at meal times and inbetween. The kitchen was clean and tidy. It was stocked with sufficient supplies of food and there were fresh vegetables available for residents. Records were kept of the fridge and freezer and cooking temperatures so that it could be seen that food was stored and prepared properly. The Expert By Experience had lunch with the residents. She found that the mealtime was a very nice time for the residents. People chatted to each other and it was a social occasion for them. The staff were attentive and addressed people with kindness. The lunch served was tasty and enjoyed by the residents. Three of the resident surveys returned said that they usually liked the meals at the home and one said they always did. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents were confident that their concerns would be taken seriously and acted upon. The lack of training for staff in safeguarding adults meant that residents were not fully protected. EVIDENCE: There was a complaints procedure displayed in each bedroom and on the notice board. This gave clear directions on who to make a complaint to and that a response would be made within 28 days. The procedure also had the address and telephone number of the Commission. A record of complaints made was kept at Longworth House. One had been recorded since the previous inspection. No complaints had been made direct to the Commission in this period. Residents spoken to said that they’d no complaints about the way they were looked after. One resident said “I’ve no complaints at all. I’m quite happy.” All of the resident surveys returned said that they knew who to speak to if they were not happy and knew how to make a complaint. Six of the relative surveys said that they knew how to make a complaint. One comment said, “A printed sheet of how to make a complaint is in each bedroom” and another said “I have received all the necessary information in the contract”. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The procedures for reporting abuse had been made more specific. The addition of relevant telephone numbers meant that staff were aware of how to inform the Social Services and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. There was a whistleblowing policy. The deputy manager said that she went through the safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures when people started work but very few of the staff had received formal training in this topic. There were other policies and procedures that protected residents. These included gifts and bequests, the management of residents’ money and a missing resident procedure. The missing resident procedure was not clear, as it did not tell staff that they must inform the Commission about the incident no matter how long the resident was missing. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents were very happy with their accommodation at the home and lived in a safe, clean, and well-maintained environment. Infection control procedures did not protect residents or staff. EVIDENCE: The home was very clean, well decorated and well maintained. A new carpet had been fitted in the hallway, stairs and upper landing. The hallway had been redecorated. The furnishings were very homely. Residents could bring in items of their own furniture if they wished to and evidence of this was seen in some rooms. Residents could call for staff assistance from each bedroom, bathroom and toilet. Three of the resident surveys returned said that the home was always fresh and clean and one said it usually was. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Only two bedrooms were double rooms. There was screening in these so that care could be given in private. A resident said, “My wife and I are in a room together.” There was a separate designated laundry room with washable floor and walls. This had a washer with a sluice programme. The dryer was emptied of lint daily, which reduced the risk of fire. There was a sink, liquid soap and gloves available for dealing with soiled items. Additional washing and drying facilities had been fitted in the back porch. Care staff did the laundry duties. The infection control policy stated that gloves and disposable aprons were to be used when at risk of coming into direct contact with body fluids. Staff were observed to give care without wearing plastic aprons to protect themselves and the residents from cross infection. Staff were seen to bring soiled linen down the corridor against their uniforms. As they then went on to give care to other residents this increased the chances of cross infection. A carer was seen to enter the kitchen without wearing any protective clothing (plastic apron or tabard). As this person had been involved with care duties previous to entering the kitchen there was the potential for food items to be contaminated. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet the needs of the residents. The recruitment practices were thorough enough to ensure that residents were safeguarded. The amount of staff training was not sufficient, which may place residents at risk of harm or result in their needs not being met. EVIDENCE: There was a duty rota for the home that showed the name of the staff and the hours they worked. There was one senior and 2 carers on duty during the day and at night-time there were 2 carers and a senior person on sleep-in. The Deputy manager had some hours each week to enable her to concentrate on administrative duties. There was a Cook and at least one domestic on duty each day. Three of the residents surveys said that staff were always available when they need them and one said they usually were available. A member of staff said, “We’re kept busy but there’s generally enough staff on duty.” The files for three new staff members were examined. These showed that an application form was completed giving a full employment history. References were requested and a Criminal Records Bureau check done. Two of the files had only one reference. The Manager said that it was sometimes difficult to get a response from previous employers. A member of staff spoken to confirmed that her employment had been done thoroughly. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 A short Induction was done at the beginning of employment. This covered fire safety and other important issues. Some staff were booked on a Learn Direct Induction Course. The home had a copy of the Skills for Care 12 week Common Induction Standards but was not yet using this. Staff were not receiving initial training and annual updates in a variety of subjects that they needed to be able to do their work. Over 60 of staff had the National Vocational Qualification in care and there was a genuine commitment for all staff to obtain this qualification. Some of the staff were now doing their level 3, as they wished to broaden their knowledge and skills. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35, 36 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. More quality assurance systems were needed to show that the home was run in the best interests of the residents. Residents’ finances were well managed. All staff had not received training in mandatory subjects. This meant that the health, safety and welfare of residents and staff might not be fully promoted and protected. EVIDENCE: The day- to-day management of the home was done by one of the registered persons. The Deputy Manager had completed the NVQ level 4 in care and management with a view to becoming the registered manager for the home in the near future. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 There were no formal auditing systems in place. The lack of formal audits meant that there were no records to show effective self-management. There were no ways of identifying their own shortfalls and of plans to remedy these. Residents meetings were now being held. Minutes were kept of the meetings and showed what action was to be taken and who by. Staff meetings were now being held on a regular basis and staff spoken to confirmed that they could speak freely at these. Residents were able to control their own money if willing and able. There were safe keeping facilities and money was kept for a number of residents. There was a record to show the transactions and the balance. Three of these were checked against the cash held and found to be correct. If any valuables or money was given in for safekeeping a receipt was given. Supervisions were now being done with staff. There was a recording sheet that showed the dates of the supervision. A member of staff said, “ We talk about any problems that I might be having, whether I’m happy working here, any targets that I have, and my aims for the future. You can say what you really think and feel.” All appliances and equipment were serviced as required. There was always one person on duty with the first aid qualification. From the training records seen it was evident that not all staff had received an annual update in: Manual Handling; Safeguarding Adults; and basic food hygiene. Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.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 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 1 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 2 30 1 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 X 2 X 3 3 X 2 Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 2 Standard OP8 OP9 Regulation 13(4)(c) 13(2) Requirement Timescale for action 01/11/07 3 OP26 13(3) 4 OP38 18(1)(c) All residents must be moved in a safe way so that they, or staff, are not injured. Residents who self-medicate 01/11/07 must keep their medications in a secure place so that no one else can get hold of them. Staff must ensure that they wear 01/11/07 disposable aprons and gloves when doing care duties so that the potential for cross infection is controlled. All staff must receive training in: 31/01/08 manual handling; Safeguarding Adults; and Basic Food Hygiene, so that they have the skills and knowledge to do their work. (Previous timescale of 31/12/06 not met) RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Good Practice Recommendations DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Longworth House 1 2 3 4 Standard OP7 OP7 OP7 OP9 The care plans should tell staff exactly what they must do for the resident so that they know what care to give. The review of the care plan should make a statement to show what progress has been made during the month so that it can be seen whether the care is effective or not. The resident or their relative should be involved when the care plan is reviewed so that they are aware if any changes have been made to the care to be given. When packets of tablets are opened they should be dated so that it can be easily seen if the right amount of medication has been given. The medications for return should be entered into the record book as and when they were no longer needed so that it is apparent if any are mislaid. The missing persons procedure should tell staff that they must report all incidents of missing residents to the Commission. If there is difficulty in obtaining a reference then a file note should be made about this and an alternative referee requested. All new staff should have an Induction that complies with the Skills For Care 12 week Common Induction standards so that they receive the basic skills and knowledge to do their work. There should be systems in place to enable the manager to audit the standard of care and services provided by the home. 5 6 7 OP18 OP29 OP30 8 OP33 Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Lancashire Area Office Unit 1 Tustin Court Portway Preston PR2 2YQ National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 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 Longworth House DS0000009451.V347913.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!