Inspection on 04/07/06 for Mariner`s Court

This inspection was carried out on 4th July 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Good. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Mariner`s Court 11/11/09

Mariner`s Court 14/09/07

Mariner`s Court 21/10/05

Mariner`s Court 14/06/04

Mariner`s Court 07/04/04

Mariner`s Court 01/03/04

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 Mariner`s Court 44/46 Laidleys Walk Fleetwood Lancashire FY7 7JL Lead Inspector Christopher Bond Unannounced Inspection 10:30 4th July 2006 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 Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.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. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Mariner`s Court Address 44/46 Laidleys Walk Fleetwood Lancashire FY7 7JL 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) 01253 872493 01253 872493 Century Healthcare Limited Care Home 24 Category(ies) of Dementia (23), Old age, not falling within any registration, with number other category (4), Physical disability (1) of places Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. All future admissions to the home must be service users from the Dementia (DE) category. The home is registered for a maximum of 24 service users to include: Up to 23 service users in the category of DE Up to 1 service user in the category of PD 4 named service users in the category of OP (old age not falling into any other category) who may be accommodated within the overall registered places 21st October 2005 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Mariner’s Court is a home that is registered to provide care for 23 service users who have dementia. There are also four service users who currently live at the home who are assessed as not having dementia. The home is a detached property and overlooks the boating lake on Fleetwood promenade. This is a three- storey property and has 24 single rooms. Ten of these rooms have en-suite facilities and there is a through floor lift. There are four lounge areas on the ground floor, one of which is a smoker’s lounge. There are shops and services in the local area and bus services operate from a short distance away. Fleetwood sea front is a short walk away and the town centre is within half a mile. There are garden areas to the side of the home and a yard to the rear. Residents have access to these areas and can sit out in good weather. At the time of this visit, (04/07/06) the information given to the Commission showed that the fees for care at the home are from £355.50 to £366.00 per week, with added expenses for hairdressing and chiropody. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection that took place over a total of 5 hours. A tour of the home included bedrooms, lounge and dining areas, and bathrooms. All areas were clean, hygienic and pleasantly furnished. Administration records were also examined. Everyone was very friendly, welcoming and co-operative throughout the visit. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Most of the care staff at the home now have a nationally recognised care qualification (National Vocational Qualification level 2 or 3). This means that they are better trained to attend to peoples needs. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The manager has now achieved National Vocational Qualification level 4 and has a recognised management qualification. She has applied for to the Commission for Social Care Inspection to be registered as manager of the home. Procedures for ensuring that people are safeguarded from harm have improved. This means that the residents of the home are safer. What they could do better: 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. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 1 and 3. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Thorough admittance procedures and careful assessment ensures that the home can meet people’s needs. Written information provided to prospective residents is good enabling an informed decision about admission to the home to be made. EVIDENCE: It was clear through looking at the residents’ files that good assessment had been completed before they came to live at the home. These assessments contained some good information about what the person’s current needs were. By looking at these needs the manager of the home would then decide whether or not the service could meet the person’s needs. This information would then be used to prepare a plan of care for the resident. The home’s Statement of Purpose and Service Users Guide is a set of written information that tells people about the care service that is offered, who the manager and staff are, and what the resident can expect if he or she decides Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 to live at the home. This has been reviewed and updated. Each resident had been given a copy of this information. Two visiting relatives said that they had been involved in the pre admission assessment of their relation before they were admitted. They had also been given the written information about the home and the services it offers. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents health and social care needs are met and people are treated with dignity and respect at this home. Residents are supported and protected in their daily lives. EVIDENCE: All of the residents living at the home had a plan of care where important information was recorded. All of the plans were reviewed on a regular basis so that information was kept current and up-to –date and to see if the home was caring for the resident correctly. Evidence of this could be seen when looking through the care plans. A review meeting was being held during the inspection and relatives of the resident had been invited to participate in the review. One relative said, “the manager contact us regularly to invite us to my mum’s review. We always try and come, it’s good to know that she’s being looked after properly.” Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Notes were kept of the outcome of any visits or healthcare professional input, providing evidence that individual health care needs were met. One resident had been admitted to the home with a pressure sore. There was evidence on her care plan to show that she had regular visits by the district nurse and that the home had the correct equipment to help care for her. None of the residents were responsible for their own medication. Systems were in place that ensured that medication was handled correctly and professionally. The records of all the people who received medication were seen and there were no concerns. Each resident had a photograph attached to his or her record sheet to help with identification. Only senior staff gave out the medication. The home had a separate room where medication was stored safely and securely, and some of the records were kept. There was evidence that the pharmacist visited the home to advise on medication issues. The care staff files held evidence that recent training had taken place in medication awareness. Two of the care staff confirmed that the training had been useful. Two of the residents were spoken to and both said that they were treated with dignity and respect. One resident said, “ All the staff are really helpful and caring.” There were some good examples seen by the inspector of how respectful staff were when talking to residents and dealing with their specific needs. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents enjoy planned and stimulating activities. Friends and family are made welcome within the home, which helps to maintain positive relationships. Mealtimes are planned and unhurried and residents’ preferences are respected. EVIDENCE: The home had a person who was specifically employed to organise activities for the residents. There was a list of the week’s activities on the wall. These included ball games, exercise, singing, arts and crafts, bingo, baking and trips out. There were also activities specifically aimed at those with dementia, such as reminiscence discussions. This helped those with dementia to recall their past and improve their memory. Some of the residents were enjoying a game of bingo during the inspection. Other residents were having their hair done. Some of the residents were able to go out alone. One gentleman had a bike and was able to visit friends and go to the shops. He said, “I enjoy my independence and I’m encouraged to go out. There’s always plenty for me to do and I can always find a quiet corner.” The gentleman was a smoker and the home had a smoking lounge. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 There was a section on the care plan that highlighted what people’s interests were and things that they enjoyed doing. Some of the assessments had lots of information about the residents past and the things people used to do before coming to live at the home. This was good because it gave the care staff information to begin conversations and invoke memories. The Fylde Coast has a low population of people with an ethnic background, which means that there are fewer people admitted to Mariner’s Court from differing cultures. This was discussed with the manager and she was fully aware of the need to ensure equality and to celebrate diversity within the home. The visitors’ book showed that there were lots of relatives who visited the home. Relatives were always invited to care plan reviews and one relative who was interviewed said, “They always look after us when we come here and we’re always made to feel welcome.” The residents were enjoying their lunchtime meal during the inspection. There was a choice of meal and the dining room was pleasant. The food looked wholesome and appealing. Two gentlemen had a special table prepared for them at the front of the home because they liked to eat alone. It was a warm day and there were plenty of drinks available for the residents. The residents were given time to eat their food and there was plenty of assistance available from care staff. The residents had their likes and dislikes recorded on their care plans. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Good abuse awareness helps to keep residents safe from harm. Complaints are treated seriously to ensure that the residents’ rights are protected. EVIDENCE: There had been a recent training course regarding abuse awareness for staff at the home. There were also policy documents for the staff to read about how to recognise and report suspected abuse. Three of the staff that were spoken to said that they had a good awareness of this important issue and knew what to do if they were not happy about something they had seen. The manager was aware of her responsibilities and knew whom to contact should abuse be suspected. It was evident that the manager was doing her utmost to ensure that people were safeguarded within the home. The home had recently received one complaint. This had been passed to the manager to investigate by the Commission for Social Care Inspection, and had been dealt with properly. All of the staff that were spoken to said that they knew what to do if someone was unhappy about the service. The complaints procedure was displayed in several parts of the home. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents are provided with a comfortable, clean and hygienic environment and bedrooms were personalised. This means that residents will feel at home with their belongings around them. EVIDENCE: A tour of the home showed that the general environment was good; furnishings were very comfortable and aids and adaptations are in place to help with the residents’ mobility and personal toilet and bathing needs. Bedrooms were personalised and comfortable and two residents were able to say that they were happy with their room. The manager clearly took the maintenance and cleanliness of the home seriously. A member of the maintenance team visited the home during the inspection to complete small tasks. The company that owns the home recently Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 forwarded a maintenance and renewal schedule for the home to the Commission. The home was well maintained throughout. One of the domestic staff for the home was spoken to during the inspection. She described her cleaning regime and the action that she took when addressing particular hygeine issues. She expressed her pride in the cleanliness of the home. The home looked and smelled clean and hygienic. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29, 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Good recruitment practices meant that residents were protected from unsuitable staff working in the home. Staff were trained and competent to do their jobs. EVIDENCE: There were enough care staff on duty during the inspection to ensure that the assessed needs of the residents were adequately dealt with. There was a training programme, which was displayed on the wall of the office. It was good to see that all of the care staff had received training in dementia care. Other important training included optical awareness, abuse awareness, first aid, health and safety, food hygiene and medication awareness. There were planned courses in Alzheimer’s awareness and understanding challenging behaviour. Three of the care staff were spoken to and all said that the training in the home was beneficial to their work. Over 50 of the care staff had a nationally recognised qualification in care. Staff records showed that new carers had been properly checked before starting their jobs. This helped to make sure that the residents were safer. There was a good induction process to help ensure that new care staff were competent before commencing their role. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 and 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents are supported by an competent manager and there are quality systems in place to make sure that they are protected. Insufficient mangement hours mean that the manager does not always have enough time to manage the home to the best of her ability. EVIDENCE: The manager of the home had a recognised management qualification and had achieved her National Vocational Qualification level 4 in care. She ran the home well and had the respect of all of the care staff that were spoken to. One of the visitors to the home said, “The manager is doing a good job, she makes sure everything is right for the residents here.” Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The manager was currently in the process of becoming registered by the Commission for Social Care Inspection. This was a fairly large home and could get very busy. There were still concerns that the manager only worked for 20 hours per week in her position. The rest of her duties were on the care side, supporting residents. The position of manager should be full-time to ensure continuity and stability in managing Mariner’s Court. Care staff had been trained in ensuring the safety of residents. This included learning how to move people safely and ensuring that food was prepared and served hygienically. Good records were being kept of safety checks within the home. These showed that tradesmen were checking the lift, electric and gas equipment and the fire alarm system regularly. This helped to ensure that the residents lived in a safe home. The care staff completed a quality assurance form with the residents and their relatives during care plan reviews. This information was gathered and used to improve the service. For example, they were asked about the catering within the home, the care that was offered, the staffing of the home and the environment. There was evidence that care professionals had been approached regarding their views on the home. External views are important and it shows that the home values the opinions of people from other care agencies. Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 4 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 3 X 3 3 3 3 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 X 3 X 3 X X 3 Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 2. Standard OP31 Regulation 12 Requirement The manager must ensure that she is given sufficient time to manage the home to guarantee clarity of responsibility. Timescale of 31/03/06 not achieved. Timescale for action 31/08/06 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Commission for Social Care Inspection North Lancashire Area Office 2nd Floor, Unit 1, Tustin Court Port Way Preston PR2 2YQ 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 Mariner`s Court DS0000009674.V299478.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 - 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!