Inspection on 21/01/08 for Market Street (152)

This inspection was carried out on 21st January 2008.

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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 2 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Market Street (152) 12/05/06

Market Street (152) 20/10/05

Market Street (152) 18/04/05

Market Street (152) 27/09/04

Market Street (152) 19/04/04

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Market Street (152) 152 Market Street East Ham London E6 2PU Lead Inspector Sarah Greaves Unannounced Inspection 21st January 2008 13:00 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.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 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.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. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Market Street (152) Address 152 Market Street East Ham London E6 2PU 020 8470 2535 0208472 3717 queendollydot@hotmail.co.uk 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 Grace Antwi-Nyame Ms Dorothy Mensah Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Mental disorder, excluding learning disability or registration, with number dementia (3) of places Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 12th May 2006 Brief Description of the Service: 152 Market Street is a residential home for people with mental health problems and is registered for up to three service users. The home is privately owned and the proprietor works at the establishment. The home is situated in Newham, close to the shopping facilities, amenities and transport links available at High Street North. The home comprises of a single bedroom and a communal lounge on the ground floor, and two bedrooms on the first floor. The home occupies an ordinary domestic property in a residential street. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced key inspection was conducted in one day. The inspector gathered information through speaking to two of the residents, the registered manager and one member of staff. During this inspection, two care plans and the most recent minutes from the Care Planning Approach were read, the medication was checked and the inspector toured the premises. Further information was sought through looking at policies and procedures, staff files, the minutes for individual monthly meetings with the residents and quality assurance surveys. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Four requirements and one recommendation were issued in the previous inspection report. The service evidenced that satisfactory food records were maintained and all of the bedrooms have been decorated. Hot water temperatures are checked at least weekly, and staff receive regular training in mental health issues and safeguarding vulnerable adults. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.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 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.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 and 4 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Prospective residents are assured that their needs will be appropriately assessed prior to admission and they will be supported to make an informed choice regarding whether they wish to move into the care home. EVIDENCE: The inspector read two care plans during this inspection; it was noted that both residents had been assessed by external health and social care professionals prior to admission. These assessments were supplemented by the care home’s own assessments. There service had admitted two new residents since the last inspection. The inspector was provided with documentation to evidence that visits to the care home had been arranged, which enabled the prospective residents to meet the other residents and staff, have lunch and look around the local area (accompanied by staff). The contracts provided by the home demonstrated that prospective residents were offered a trial period, which was followed by a statutory review by the placing social services. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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 and 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The needs of residents are appropriately identified and addressed through consultation with the residents and relevant health and social care professionals. The entitlements of residents to make decisions and considered risks are supported. EVIDENCE: All of the residents attended regular Care Planning Approach (CPA) meetings; the frequency of these meetings were decided upon following the completion of each CPA but tended to be three monthly, six monthly or annually. The service demonstrated that the discussions and objectives identified at the CPA meetings were used as the basis for its own care planning; this was verified by the inspector through reading two care plans as well as the minutes of the most recent CPA meetings, and through speaking to two of the residents. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Via discussions with two of the residents, the inspector found that people were supported to make decisions about their lives. One of the residents returned to the care home during the inspection, having been out with a member of staff for the grocery shopping for the care home. The inspector spoke to the resident and noted that they felt supported to make daily choices (for example, the resident enjoyed food shopping and chose a take-away lunch on the way back from shopping) as well as decisions that significantly impacted upon the quality of their life, such as maintaining family relationships, health care and participation in community and home-based activities. The registered manager had consulted with the residents regarding whether they wished to participate in a monthly group meeting, but this idea was declined by all three residents. Instead, the registered manager undertook individual meetings with each resident at the beginning of every month. The inspector looked at the minutes of these meetings and found that residents were engaged in discussions about activities at home and in the community, menu planning, and current and future plans. One of the residents was out in the community for the duration of the inspection, in accordance to their own wishes and another resident was encouraged to fulfil their intended plan to visit the post office and other local amenities. The service conducted its own annual risk assessments, which were written in conjunction with the risk assessments produced at the CPA meetings (the care home’s risk assessments were updated as necessary if an individual’s circumstances changed or specific findings occurred at the CPA). The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of the needs of each resident, including the risks and difficulties that they might experience in the community. Via discussion with the inspector, it was identified that the registered manager had spoken to local shopkeepers when necessary to foster good relationships and to alleviate any concerns. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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 and 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are supported with positive activities, including the maintenance of important relationships. The service assisted people to make their own food choices, including the inclusion of healthy options. EVIDENCE: Through reading the care plans and the Care Planning Approach (CPA) minutes, and discussions with residents and the registered manager, the inspector observed that the service encouraged people to engage in meaningful activities that promoted therapeutic benefits, independence and fulfilment. The inspector noted that there were difficulties if a resident did not feel motivated due to their mental health problems; however, the service clearly documented that on-going attempts were made to support people with their social development. One of the residents was accompanied to local day Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 centres and drop-in groups (in accordance with their own wishes for staff support) and a resident received a small payment for looking after the garden. Residents were encouraged to take part in the daily activities for the household, such as shopping, tidying their rooms, personal laundry tasks and food preparation. One of the residents enjoyed visiting the library regularly and another resident had expressed an interest in adult education classes; staff had assisted by finding out details for enrolment. The registered manager stated that all of the residents actively maintained their chosen relationships (with their families), through visiting, receiving visits and telephone contact, which was confirmed to the inspector via conversations with two of the residents. The inspector found that the rights of residents were respected, for example, to visit local mental health resources and choose not to attend again. It was noted that the residents chose their own routine throughout the inspection. The registered manager consulted residents regarding whether they wished to speak to the inspector and a good understanding of the preferences of individuals was demonstrated, such as a resident who enjoyed retiring to their own room to watch television and have privacy for a while each day but also sought staff company in the communal lounge when they wished to. A requirement was issued in the previous inspection report for the service to evidence that satisfactory food records were maintained, which was met at this inspection. Residents were noted to have diverse food tastes and made their own choices at mealtimes, in accordance to the food shopping and menu planning lists drawn up at their personal monthly meeting with the registered manager. The inspector found that the care home had a balanced choice of food, including items for Caribbean and Asian food (reflecting the cultural backgrounds of the residents), fresh fruits and vegetables, several cereals and items for snacks, such as plain and chocolate biscuits. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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 and 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The personal and health care needs of residents are identified and met; however, the service needs to improve upon the medication issues addressed in this report. EVIDENCE: The care plans identified that all of the residents were self-caring with their personal hygiene needs, although different types of support were given in accordance to individual assessed needs (such as prompting or support to purchase clothes and toiletries). The inspector noted that the care plans also identified what kind of support was needed to enable people to change their bed linen and launder their own items. Via discussion with the registered manager and through reading the care plans, the inspector found that the service appropriately addressed the health Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 care needs of the residents. As previously stated, all of the residents attended regular Care Planning Approach (CPA) meetings, which were also attended by the registered manager. These meetings reviewed the mental health care needs of individuals, as well as discussing any general health care needs. It was noted that residents were receiving different types of support, as determined through the CPA process, such as regular monitoring visits from social workers, community psychiatric nursing input, specialist oncology services and a referral to an occupational therapist for social activities. One resident was assisted to commence a no-smoking programme. All of the residents were registered with a local General Practitioner and were supported to access other community health services as required, such as dentists. The registered manager was able to present detailed information in regard to the health care needs of each resident. It was noted in one of the care plans that the monthly weight record for a resident did not have entries for a few months. The registered manager stated that sometimes the resident refused to be weighed; the inspector advised that the person’s refusal needed to be documented and staff also needed to ensure that they used the same system each month, rather than mixing up imperial and metric measures. The inspector checked the storage of medication and the medication records for each resident. It was noted that a prescribed medication that required refrigeration was stored in the kitchen refrigerator, as the service does not have a medication refrigerator. The registered manager was advised that this medication should be stored in a lockable container within the refrigerator. The service did not have a British National Formulary (BNF) medication guide and it was noted that the medication administration records did not consistently state the dosage. Otherwise, the storage and recording of medication was satisfactory. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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 and 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are assured that the service is responsive to complaints, and that staff are guided by good practice to safeguard people from abuse. EVIDENCE: The inspector viewed the service’s complaints procedure, which was clearly written and provided to residents (and their representatives). Residents informed the inspector that they were aware of how to make a complaint, including complaints about the care home to their social workers or to an advocate. It was noted that residents were able to express any concerns to the registered manager (through the formal meetings and during the course of the inspection). One of the residents came to speak to the registered manager during the course of the inspection and appeared very at ease speaking to her; this was to voice a concern regarding their mental health problems rather than an issue related to the service. There had been no complaints since the last inspection. The service produced a satisfactorily written Adult Protection policy. A recommendation was issued for the service to incorporate Adult Protection training into its training plan at least once every two years. Via discussion with the registered manager, it was noted that the service provided Adult Protection Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 training every year, which the inspector considered to be a suitable plan. This training was received from the Newham Safeguarding Adults Team last year. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 and 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are provided with a homely and hygienic environment. EVIDENCE: The care home occupies an ordinary two-storey domestic property in a residential road, within walking distance of the main shops and amenities in East Ham. There are nearby bus services and a local tube station. The premises comprise of a communal lounge, kitchen and one bedroom on the ground floor and two bedrooms, a bathroom and staff office on the first floor. There is also an outside toilet in the rear garden; there is a sheltered area in the garden for residents that wish to smoke. A requirement was issued in the previous inspection report for the service to re-decorate the bedrooms; this requirement had been met and residents confirmed that they had been consulted about colour schemes. The premises were satisfactorily maintained. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The care home was observed to be clean and free from any offensive odours. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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 and 36 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents benefit from receiving support from staff that have been appropriately trained and supervised; however, the registered manager must apply closer scrutiny to staff recruitment and the on going updating of recruitment files. EVIDENCE: The care home employed four members of staff, excluding the registered manager and the proprietor. The staffing rota evidenced that one member of staff was employed at each shift and another person (either the registered manager or the proprietor) provided additional staffing support during the weekdays and weekends. The registered manager and the proprietor had both attained the Registered Managers Award and Diplomas in Community Mental Health. Three of the care staff had achieved a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in Care at level 2 and one of these people was due to soon complete NVQ level 3. A requirement Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 was issued in the last inspection report for the service to ensure that staff received on-going training in mental health issues; this requirement was met. Staff had attended training provided by East London and The City NHS Trust in ‘Understanding Psychosis’ and a General Practitioner provided training on an over-view of mental health issues including post-traumatic syndromes and schizophrenia. Although the care home belonged to a national care homes organisation, the inspector advised the registered manager to investigate whether they could also join an organisation primarily focused upon addressing the needs of people with mental health problems as this could promote additional training opportunities and access to useful information. Staff training records identified that staff had attended mandatory training, which included compulsory first aid training in August 2007 (as a small service, all staff will either be on their own in the premises at times, or escort residents on a oneto-one basis). The inspector checked the recruitment process for the most recently appointed member of staff, who was recruited since the last inspection. It was noted that the employee had previously worked in two privately employed positions (for example, a carer or nanny within a private household) and references had been obtained. As the person had also worked for several years in an NHS hospital up until 2007, the inspector advised that the registered manager should have sought a third reference from the NHS in these circumstances, taking into account the need for employers to vigilantly satisfy themselves that as much information as possible is gathered regarding people employed to work with vulnerable adults. It was also noted in a second staff file that one member of staff did not have verification of their entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom beyond February 2006. The registered manager stated that the staff member had brought in appropriate documentation to demonstrate this but a copy was not taken for the file. The inspector requested for this evidence to be sent to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Only one member of staff had been recruited since the last inspection. The inspector looked at this individual’s training record in order to establish if they had fulfilled an induction programme that met the Skills for Care standards; this was evidenced. The supervision notes for two members of staff were looked at during this inspection. These records demonstrated that staff received at least six formal one-to-one supervisions each year and relevant issues were discussed during these meetings. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 and 42 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents receive a service that is well managed and seeks their views for improvement, although the views of other relevant parties should also be sought. Residents are protected through appropriate health and safety practices. EVIDENCE: As previously identified in this report, the registered manager is qualified for her position, and she has several years experience of managing services for Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 people with mental health problems. The service has demonstrated a good record of meeting requirements and recommendations, and the registered manager evidenced that she seeks out new initiatives for improvement. Following earlier consultation with the Commission for Social Care Inspection, the service was advised that it was not necessary for the proprietor to undertake unannounced monitoring visits of the service as the proprietor works at the care home. It was noted that the service sought the views of the residents through using surveys, for example, to audit the views of the admission process from the most recently placed resident. The registered manager was recommended to also pursue the opinions of the relatives of the residents and other stakeholders (for example, the medical, health care and social care professionals at the Care Planning Approach meetings). A requirement was issued in the previous inspection report for the service to ensure that the hot water temperatures were recorded weekly; this requirement was met. At this inspection the inspector looked at the following health and safety records, which were found to be satisfactory; portable electrical appliances annual check, electrical installations inspection by a competent person, fire drills and the annual maintenance of fire equipment. The service had received a visit from the London Fire Emergency Planning Authority in May 2007, which was satisfactory. The inspector noted that the fire risk assessment was written in 2004; the registered manager was recommended to evidence that this assessment is reviewed every year. The service was unable to locate a copy of the annual gas safety certificate; the inspector requested for a copy to be sent to the Commission for Social Care Inspection, which was complied with. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.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 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 3 5 X 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 2 35 3 36 3 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 X 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 2 X 3 X 3 X X X 3 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 NO Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA20 Regulation 13 Requirement The registered manager must ensure that there is a lockable facility for the storage of refrigerated medications, in order for the safety of residents to be promoted. The registered manager must ensure that documentation regarding an employee’s residency status is maintained in the staff file. Timescale for action 31/03/08 2. YA34 19 31/03/08 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. 2. Refer to Standard YA18 YA39 Good Practice Recommendations The care home should clearly document that a person has refused to be weighed, if this monitoring has been sought by a health care professional. The care home should seek the views of the representatives of the residents and other relevant health and social care professionals. Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Ilford Area Office Ferguson House 113 Cranbrook Road Ilford London 1G1 4PU 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 Market Street (152) DS0000022884.V355313.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!