Inspection on 17/05/07 for Maple House

This inspection was carried out on 17th May 2007.

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. These are things the inspector asked to be changed, but found they had not done. The inspector also made 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Maple House 11/04/08

Maple House 22/05/06

Maple House 21/11/05

Maple House 18/05/05

Maple House 18/11/04

Maple House 14/06/04

Similar services:

Hillside

Applegarth

122 Scorer Street

Jubilee Villa Care Home

Thornham Grove

Beech Lodge

8 Thorndale Road (Homefield College)

Hunter`s Lodge

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Maple House 51 Peveril Road Tibshelf Alfreton Derbyshire DE55 5LR Lead Inspector Tony Barker Key Unannounced Inspection 17th May 2007 09:20 Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.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 Adults 18-65. 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. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Maple House Address 51 Peveril Road Tibshelf Alfreton Derbyshire DE55 5LR (01773) 872720 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) Mr Peter South Mr Peter South Care Home 5 Category(ies) of Learning disability (5) registration, with number of places Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 5th October 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Maple House is a care home situated in Tibshelf village near Alfreton. The Home is a semi-detached house on an estate at the edge of the village. It has recently had an increase in registered service users from 3 to 5 following an extension to the premises. The current service users in the Home receive day services for five days of the week and are supported at other times to undertake activities within the local community. The fees are currently £380 per week. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The time spent on this inspection was 7.25 hours and was a key unannounced inspection. Survey forms were posted to the four current service users but these were not completed due to the service users’ limited understanding of the forms. The Manager, Assistant Manager and three of the four male service users were spoken to and records were inspected. There was also a tour of the premises. Two service users were case tracked so as to determine the quality of service from their perspective. This inspection focussed on all the key standards and on the progress made towards achieving the requirements and recommendations made at the last inspection. The pre-inspection questionnaire had not been returned by the provider at the time of this inspection, though this was later received. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The Manager must enrol on NVQ Level 4 in management, or equivalent, to ensure a high standard of management within the Home. Further efforts should be made to encourage funding agencies’ involvement with service users. Some improvements are needed to the recording of medicines. Certain records should be prominently displayed. The Manager and staff should be appropriately qualified. Some Health & Safety matters need to be addressed. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2&5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Individual written needs assessments were in place immediately following the emergency admission of the last two service users, so that their diverse needs were identified and planned for. EVIDENCE: The two service users who were the most recently admitted – in August 2006 were case tracked. Both were admitted in an emergency and had a recorded assessment of their needs, undertaken by the Home, within a week of admission. The placing social worker for one service user visited the Home within one week of the admission and a completed care plan was made available to the Home. A care plan, together with other assessments, was made available to the Home with regard to the other service user. Contracts between the Home and the placing agencies were in place for both service users. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users had an individual plan of care which indicated that they were treated as individuals and encouraged to make decisions about their lives. EVIDENCE: There was a generally good set of care plans and associated risk assessments relating to the two service users. Each care plan had an associated Implementation Sheet and Evaluation Sheet – the latter showing evidence of regular care plan reviews. However, there had been no formal care plan review meeting, initiated by the placing agency, since the admission of the two case tracked service users, or for several years regarding another service user. The agency was clearly not monitoring the care received by service users at the Home although the Manager explained that he had attempted to secure such meetings on several occasions. Discussions with the Manager, and Assistant Manager, indicated that the Home was taking a ‘person centred’ approach to service users and they were recommended to enquire into the relatively new practice of ‘person centred planning’. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Two care plans mentioned limitations on the service user’s unsupervised movements outside the Home. The Manager stated that full discussion with, and agreement by, external professionals had taken place with regard to this policy and there was a record, with signatures, to support this. One service user chooses to visit his mother and to shop in Chesterfield – using public transport independently, the Manager explained. The Manager and Assistant Manager also stated that the service users all choose which local pub to go to. They also choose which activities they get involved in and their going to bed times and rising times at weekends. Only on weekday mornings is there an expectation to rise in sufficient time to catch the transport to their respective day services. Examples of service users taking responsible risks were given by the Manager. One service user cycles every Wednesday with the local cycling club and takes a responsible attitude to using gardening tools in the garden. All service users use the facilities of the kitchen and risk assessments were in place to reflect this, as well as potential scalding from radiators. There was also a risk assessment in place to address one service user taking a bath. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,15,16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Home provided activities and services that were age-appropriate and valued by service users and promoted their independence. EVIDENCE: Service users were all attending day services five days a week. One was involved in a varied range of services that reflected his interests and was chosen by him. He was being paid for two days a week conservation work and this reflected his particular enjoyment of outside activities, the Manager said. This service user eagerly produced photographs of his conservation work, during this inspection. One case tracked service user was also undertaking conservation work as work experience from his college and he spoke positively about painting fences and sawing up trees during the day. The Manager spoke of elements of another service user’s social life being fulfilling - for example, five-aside football and being the caller at a weekly bingo session – as evidenced by the service user’s positive recall of these activities. Care plans contained regular recording of all service users’ social activities, including Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 locally based ones and foreign holidays. It was clear from these records that their ‘horizons had been widened’ since living at Maple House. One service user is a member of a local cycling club during the Summer, on Wednesday nights, and attended a ‘disco’ during the Winter months. He enthusiastically produced photographs and certificates, regarding his cycling, at this inspection. Additionally, he and one of the case tracked service users goes to a social club for people with learning disabilities once a week. All service users enjoy ‘Karaoke’ held at a local pub, the Manager said. One service user has a particular friend who he sees every day at his day service provision. The Manager spoke of the potential benefits to the service user of extending this relationship to the care home but this has not transpired, for no lack of encouragement from the Manager. This service user has no contact with his family but the others all have good levels of contact. The two well established service users are well known to local people, the Manager commented, and the other two are becoming well known. The Manager spoke of close friendships having been developed between the two new service users and one particular existing service user, spending time in each other’s bedrooms watching television, for example, and this was confirmed in discussions with them. Service users were involved, to varying extents, in domestic activities. They had full access to all parts of the Home other than to the private accommodation belonging to the Manager and his wife and to each other’s bedrooms, unless invited. Three had a key their bedroom door and the fourth had chosen not to. The Manager explained that service users were independent regarding their personal hygiene, apart from one service user needing help from staff with shaving. This meant that they had full privacy while using the bathroom and toilet. Staff knock on bedroom doors before entering, the Manager said. A good range of meals were described on the Home’s 6-week rolling menu. Foodstocks in the larder, freezer and refrigerator were good and included fresh fruit and vegetables. Most food was bought ‘on line’ but one service user used the local Co-op store for ‘topping up’ one of two items of food. Care plans included a record of service users’ food dislikes. It was particularly obvious, from discussions with the Assistant Manager, that a ‘person centred’ approach is taken with regard to service users’ food preferences. Mealtimes were very flexible and reflected the activities being carried out at the time. One case tracked service user said, “Nice food”. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Home was providing service users with personal support in the way they preferred and required and was meeting their physical and emotional health needs. EVIDENCE: The Manager explained that the service users’ level of dependency was such that they seldom needing prompting or guidance on day to day matters. One service user needed assistance with shaving but the others just required prompting. They chose their own clothes to wear each day, although guidance was needed when out clothes shopping. They were each able to make their needs known verbally. The Manager provided evidence that the service users were being encouraged to be as independent as possible. There was documentary evidence of service users receiving medical checks and of medical appointments being kept. Records showed appointments with GP, hospital fracture clinic, dermatologist, dentist and ophthalmologist. One service user’s diabetes was well controlled by his diet and was on no medication for his condition. Another had been provided with speech therapy in the past but none for the last six years. The Manager said that he was still not being kept informed by Social Services who had referred two service users for specialist health input relating to an aspect of their behaviour. They were Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 also attending six monthly appointments with a consultant psychiatrist who was continuing to maintain limitations on their unsupervised movements outside the Home. The Manager said he felt the particular behaviour concerned was no longer a problem and did not feel these restrictions were still necessary. He thought their liberty was being curtailed inappropriately. He said he was planning to write to the Local Authority, on both these matters, expressing his concerns. The two case tracked service users had had a general health check six months ago when they became patients at the local surgery. Only one service user was in receipt of prescribed medication. This was being securely stored. His Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheet was examined and was satisfactory except that... • handwritten entries were not countersigned and • codes were used to denote the service user’s absence and when medication was omitted but had no explanatory key. The Deputy Manager had undertaken a training course in dealing with medication and had ‘cascaded’ this training to the Manager, a qualified nurse, as an update for him. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Good procedures for handling complaints and abuse were in place ensuring service users were fully protected. EVIDENCE: The Home’s complaints procedure was kept inside a cabinet in the entrance hall, and not in a prominent position. A record of complaints received had been developed and the Manager said he would be adding sections on ‘Action Taken’ and ‘Outcome’. He added that there had never been any complaints. Certificates were seen to support the Manager’s statement that he and the Assistant Manager had attended a half-day training course on ‘Safeguarding Adults’ run by a private company. He also had a training CD Rom from Derbyshire County Council (DCC) and a DCC Policy and Procedures document. The Manager showed awareness of good practice in this area. Both case tracked service users’ financial records were examined and were crossreferenced to monies held. They were satisfactory. The Assistant Manager said that she checks balances on these records at each transaction and there was recorded evidence of this. The Home’s ‘whistle blowing’ policy was examined and found to be satisfactory. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were living in a safe and hygienic environment, which was furnished and decorated to a good standard. EVIDENCE: Several communal areas of the Home had been redecorated since the previous inspection and the Home was now well decorated and furnished and homely. Each of the five bedrooms had appropriate lockable doors. Three of the four occupied bedrooms were examined, accompanied by the service users. These were found to be well-personalised and provided evidence of the interests held by each service user. There was evidence, outside the premises, of work on the building and garden nearing completion – a new driveway had been built and replacement guttering almost completed. There were some building materials in the rear garden, which was somewhat untidy. The Home was clean and hygienic, with no unpleasant odours. The Control of Infection policy was found to be satisfactory. There was a dedicated sink in the utility room that could be used for pre-washing any items of soiled Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 clothing. There was no need for sluicing facilities as service users were fully continent. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34 & 35 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The Home’s staff had been recruited and appropriately trained to ensure that service users were safe, although further training was needed. EVIDENCE: The staff at the Home comprised the Manager, Assistant Manager and one full time care assistant. The Manager and Assistant Manager displayed appropriate commitment to the service users and had a comfortable relationship with them. Only brief contact was made with the care assistant. The Manager spoke of plans for the care assistant to take a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) at level 2. At present the Home does not meet the National Minimum Standard to maintain a staff group with at least 50 qualified staff. The file of the care assistant, appointed in November 2006, was examined. All matters relating his recruitment were satisfactory. The Manager had up-to-date guidelines for Induction and Foundation training, for new staff, under the Learning Disability Award Framework (LDAF). However, he had not provided induction training, to LDAF standards, to the Assistant Manager or care assistant. He was recommended to approach a suitable organisation, such as the British Institute for Learning Disabilities Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 (BILD), for advice on taking this forward. The Manager and Assistant Manager had attended training courses on Fire, Basic Food Hygiene and First Aid. The care assistant had attended Basic Food Hygiene training and was awaiting fire training through an in-house approved Fire Safety video. He had not received First Aid training. No staff at the Home had received Health & Safety training as had been intended. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. 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 are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39,41 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Generally good management systems were in place to protect service users although these were potentially limited by the Manager’s lack of a managerial qualification. EVIDENCE: The Manager is a nurse qualified in work with adults with a learning disability and with 17 years experience with this client group. He said he had not yet applied to attend an NVQ course in Management at level 4 and the Inspector informed him of the Registered Managers Award. Satisfaction questionnaires, completed by three of the service users in Autumn 2006, were examined. These had been completed with support from the Manager and from the respective day services attended by these service users. Responses were generally positive. Satisfaction questionnaires had not been developed for other stakeholders such as relatives and external professionals. He had been developing a National Minimum Standard (NMS) based check list Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 of the Home’s services although he had, so far, only completed this as far as NMS 1. The Home still had no Annual Development Plan. The Home had, in place, all records required by regulation. However, the registration certificate was kept inside a cabinet in the entrance hall, and not in a prominent position. There was evidence of good food hygiene practices in the kitchen. The Home was using a Food Standards Agency record each day to record food temperatures, menu sheets and any problems occurring. Cleaning materials were being stored in an unlocked wall cupboard in the utility room. The Manager spoke of plans to move them into a lockable cupboard under the stairs. Product Data sheets, as required by the Control Of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations, were in place. There was documentary evidence of Portable Appliance Tests (PAT) being undertaken within the previous 12 months and of a current Electrical Installation Certificate. The weekly fire alarm test, and fire drill, records were examined and found to be satisfactory. The gas safety certificate was current. There were no recorded environmental risk assessments. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 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 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 2 X 3 X 3 3 X Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Yes 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 YA37 Regulation 9(2)(b)(i) Requirement The registered manager must enrol on NVQ Level 4 in management, or equivalent, to ensure a high standard of management within the Home. (Previous timescale was 31/12/05) Timescale for action 01/09/07 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard YA6 Good Practice Recommendations 1. 2. YA19 3. YA20 The Home should continue to encourage placing agencies to hold formal review meetings, with external professionals, the service user and relatives as appropriate, at least every six months. (This was a previous recommendation) Efforts should be continued to find out what specialist health services are being provided to two service users. A record of these details should then be maintained on care plans. (This was a previous recommendation) Handwritten Medication Administration Records should be countersigned, and explanatory keys recorded when codes DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Maple House 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. YA22 YA24 YA32 YA35 YA35 YA39 10. 11. 12. YA41 YA42 YA42 are used, in order to maintain an clear audit trail. The Home’s complaints procedure should be prominently displayed in the Home. The rear garden should be tidied. 50 of care staff should be trained to at least NVQ 2 standards. All new staff should receive induction and foundation training that meets the specifications laid down by Skills for Care. (This was a previous recommendation) The care assistant should be provided with First Aid training. The Manager should continue to develop systems for monitoring the quality of care provided at the Home, such as further stakeholder satisfaction questionnaires and an annual development plan. (This was a previous recommendation) The Home’s registration certificate should be prominently displayed. Cleaning materials should be stored in a lockable space. Environmental risk assessments should be recorded. Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Derbyshire Area Office Cardinal Square Nottingham Road Derby DE1 3QT 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 Maple House DS0000020051.V337209.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - 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!