Inspection on 23/01/07 for Matson House

This inspection was carried out on 23rd January 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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Matson House 23/05/06

Matson House 01/12/05

Matson House 25/08/05

Matson House 07/03/05

Matson House 30/07/04

Matson House 11/03/04

Matson House 24/11/03

Similar services:

2 Perhaver Park

The Vicarage

St George`s

5 Seafield Road

Credence House

Radfords

Honeybourne House

32 Beaumont Way

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Matson House Matson Lane Matson Gloucester Glos GL4 6ED Lead Inspector Mr Simon Massey Key Unannounced Inspection 23 & 24th January 2007 09:30 rd Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Matson House Address Matson Lane Matson Gloucester Glos GL4 6ED 01452 307069 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) Selwyn Care Limited Mrs Jennifer Hands Care Home 13 Category(ies) of Learning disability (13) registration, with number of places Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Date of last inspection 23rd May 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Matson House is part of the care provision offered by Selwyn Care Limited. The home is situated on the outskirts of Gloucester in the Matson area. The organisation provides residential and day care services to adults with Autistic Spectrum disorders and associated behaviours. The home shares the site with the Organisations office, another home and the day care facility. There are spacious grounds around the home, with a lake, garden, fields and a large car park. Matson House has been split into two, Charles House and George House, each occupying a separate floor of the building and each with its own staff team. There are spacious bedrooms and communal areas for use by service users, including separate kitchen, dining and lounge areas for Charles House and George House. There are also separate staff facilities for each of the houses. The home provides transport to enable the residents to access activities outside the home. The home’s Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide provide information as to the services that the home provides. The current fee range for the home begins at £1,250 per week. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection took place over two days. The inspector met with the Deputy Manager, the organisation’s Group manager, various care staff and the Training Manager. All of the service users were also met by the Inspector. Staff were observed supporting and working with the service users. Records relating to care planning, medication, staff recruitment, health and safety and staff training were examined. An inspection of the environment was also carried out. A number of questionnaires were circulated and returned as part of the inspection process. A full key inspection of the home was undertaken in May 2006, and a further two unannounced random inspections were completed in October and December 2006. This inspection was focused on the majority of the core minimum national standards and the progress made by the home in areas that had been identified as requiring improvement. The two random inspections provided evidence of the work that had been carried out by the management and care staff to improve the overall quality of care delivered to service users. This report also shows that this work has continued and evidence was seen in relation to a number of standards that improvements have been maintained. The Inspector is grateful for the co-operation of the staff and service users in completing the inspection process. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 One service user has been moved to new accommodation on the same site, due to difficulties meeting their needs in a communal setting. This has been a positive move for all service users. All staff are being required to redo the homes induction training which has been improved and updated. Efforts have continued to improve the environment through re-decoration and personalising of individual rooms. Improvements have been made to the range of activities undertaken by service users, including the number of one to one outings into the community. Staff and care practices are being more closely monitored and there was evidence that “team working” has improved. Action has been taken by the management of the service to challenge and address issues of poor practice and to increase the staff understanding and knowledge in relation to meeting the needs of people within the autistic spectrum. More variety and choice is being provided around menus. What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standard 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The admission procedure ensures that people’s needs and aspirations are assessed prior to prospective residents moving into the home EVIDENCE: There have been no admissions to the home since the previous key inspection, but the home has a procedure in place for admissions that provides for visits and overnight stays. The Group Manager explained how they were currently undertaking a number of assessments on potential admissions, and how time was being spent with service users and information being collected. There appears to be a thorough assessing of needs and the service required being undertaken. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 6, 7 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is adequate with some parts being seen as good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The care plans provide a good basis for the care planning system within the home but service users would benefit from an increased “person centred approach.” Some people may benefit form having their behavioural protocols reviewed and updated. Service users benefit from increased choice in relation to decisions about their daily lives EVIDENCE: A sample of care plans and service user files were examined. All had up to date care plans, which were signed by staff members to say they had read them. The plans provide guidance on the range of needs being met. A new approach to care planning is currently being introduced which will incorporate a new reviewing process, which it is intended will include input and feedback from the whole team. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 The files contain regular recording that is reasonably detailed and demonstrated how staff support service users to follow their routines and record any concerns or issues that arise. There was evidence that the recording of behavioural incidents is being completed correctly, and this information corresponded accurately to the notifications supplied to the Commission. Recording also included feedback from some activities that had been undertaken by service users. Recording was seen of service users exercising choice over their daily routines and being supported to make these decisions. There is a need in some plans for some behavioural protocols to be reviewed and updated. Some staff commented that the service users had more freedom within the house, and in terms of their activities in the community, following the changes that had occurred. This particularly related to the moving on of one person, who had regularly presented challenges to other service users. At the previous random inspection a recommendation was made that the home support one service user to access an advocacy service and this is currently being organised by the Provider, though it had not happened at the time of the Inspection. The placing authority are taking steps to move the service user, whilst the Provider considers the person’s needs are largely met by the service. The service user was spoken to by the inspector and appeared settled in his placement and was positive about his room, his key-worker and the food. They also said they enjoyed the “quiet” and “going out sometimes”. As this advocacy has not yet been accessed this recommendation has been repeated. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,15,16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is adequate with some parts being seen as good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Improvements have been made in the quality of the day care choices provided and service users benefit from greater structure and consistency. Fewer restrictions on access to the kitchen have improved the promotion of normal routines and choice. Changes are being implemented to improve the choice and involvement in food preparation. Service users are provided with a reasonably healthy and nutritious diet. EVIDENCE: There was evidence from records, and from talking to staff, of improved variety in daily activities being provided. One senior staff felt that staff were Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 using greater imagination and flexibility in accessing and researching opportunities. Activities included, cinema, sensory sessions, local walks, specialist clubs and college courses. More individual trips and smaller group activities are now supported, though not all staff were in complete agreement with this. Some people felt more comfortable taking service users out with other staff, and there is further monitoring being done in this area. The Provider also runs its own day centre, which some service users attend for some sessions each week. This is being moved to another part of the site which will allow for improved facilities and space to be provided. This work is due to be completed shortly and will provide improved day care opportunities for service users. Two staff, who live within the local area, commented that they thought the home was well accepted locally and that the service users were part of the local community. Examples were given of the local facilities and amenities that people are supported to attend or use. Service users are being encouraged and supported to take more responsibility for their bedrooms, both in terms of personalising them, and keeping them clean and hygienic. During the inspection two people went on shopping trips to purchase items to make their rooms more comfortable and personalised. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is good with some parts being seen as adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Clear guidance and recording supports service users to receive their personal care in a way that promotes their privacy and dignity. Service users are supported to access the healthcare professional they require to ensure that physical and emotional health needs are met. The home’s medication procedures and staff training are satisfactory but errors by staff could compromise the safety of the service users. EVIDENCE: The care plans detail the support that individuals require and also provided guidance to staff on how they would prefer this to be delivered. Individual files contain details of medical appointments and also information and correspondence from outside professionals. Staff record information following appointments in to the individual files. The medication storage and administration was examined and found to be in order. However, the Commission has received notification from the home of errors that have been made in administration. These were as a result of human Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 error and retraining and supervision were provided to the staff concerned. The home has satisfactory training and competency based assessments for staff in place in relation to the administration of medicines. However, scrutiny and auditing needs to be closely maintained to eradicate these errors. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is adequate with some parts being seen as good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Service users are being further protected by the action taken by the home to ensure all parents and relatives are aware the procedure to follow if they wish to make a complaint or raise a concern. Improved training, protocols and recording have improved the home’s ability to manage challenging behaviours and a further decrease in incidents involving aggression between service users and towards staff was identified. EVIDENCE: Records show that there has been a decrease in the number of aggressive behaviours being exhibited, both between service users and towards staff. One factor influencing this is the movement of one service to new accommodation. Staff commented that they felt there was a more relaxed atmosphere within the home and that “service users often appeared happier.” Recording of incidents have been maintained and showed that incidents were often de-escalated, and that staff were generally aware of what had triggered the behaviour. Several staff commented upon the improved understanding of the needs of the service users and the techniques and knowledge required to manage anxiety and the associated behaviour. Whilst these standards are being met, and there was evidence of good practice, this progress needs to be sustained over a period of time. The Commission has been notified of complaints and concerns that have been made and evidence was seen of issues being investigated and outcomes being provided. The management have also acted upon the findings that were established. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The home has started a new system for recording any issue or concerns or comments raised by visitors or relatives to the home. This will help ensure that concerns are communicated throughout the staff team and management, and feedback can be provided on any action taken. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Service users are benefiting from improved efforts to promote and maintain a clean and hygienic environment. Progress is being made in supporting the development of more personalised bedrooms for service users. The Provider is being pro-active in developing ideas and changes to best utilise the environment to meet the needs of the service users and provide the required office space for staff and management. EVIDENCE: There have been a number of improvements to the environment since the previous inspection. The service user in a self contained flat has had this area increased to provide more spacious and homely accommodation. Action was being taken to support people to personalise their rooms and greater efforts are being made to Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 maintain cleanliness and hygiene. Two parents spoken to also commented upon the improved cleanliness and hygiene within the home. Bedrooms are in the process of being redecorated and two had been completed at the time of the inspection. One service user said they were very pleased with their room and other people were observed enjoying the quiet and privacy of their accommodation. One bathroom was being replaced at the time of the inspection. Both kitchens were reasonably clean and hygienic and the home had had an inspection from the Environmental Health department the previous week, and were awaiting a report. Some of the cupboards were a little untidy and two items were incorrectly stored and labelled in the fridge. Changes are also being introduced to the downstairs dining area, which will help provide improved office space for the care staff. The main office has been moved to a more central position, and whilst this is temporary measure, staff commented that this had been a positive change. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34 & 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Service users are supported by a staff team who are benefiting from increased and improved training. Standards of care are being improved by the challenging of poor practice and increased monitoring and supervision of staff. Service users are protected by the home recruitment policy that complies with the current regulations. EVIDENCE: All existing staff are currently redoing the homes induction training. This training has been substantially improved since first being completed by existing staff. Staff spoken to were positive about this training and stated that it was good for the team that every one was receiving the same input. New staff interviewed were also very positive about the quality of the training and the support they are receiving to complete it. People commented that they felt well prepared for the role they were undertaking. Evidence was seen of the efforts of the Provider to challenge and improve practice. The commission has been kept informed through Regulation 37 notices of various staff disciplinary actions that have been undertaken to Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 address issues and concerns about the effectiveness of some care practices. Some newly recruited staff also did not have their contracts extended at the end of their probation periods. Whilst there has been a high turnover of staff over the previous six months all staff interviewed were positive about how the staff were communicating and working better as a team. Staff expressed greater confidence in the senior care workers and the way that shifts were led. The home has maintained the correct staffing levels through the use of agency staff and efforts have been made to use just one agency and wherever possible have agency staff working who are already familiar with the service users and the home. A new staff rota system was due to be introduced in the weeks following this inspection and this was described in detail. The new rota changes the night cover arrangements, providing 2 waking night staff and no sleeping in staff. Existing on-call arrangements will remain in place. The rota provides additional weekend time off for staff and more staffing when most activities are undertaken. Staff were positive about these changes and thought they were good for service users and staff, and would help with the meeting of needs. The new rota will also ensure that there is a senior care worker on every shift. Selwyn Care is now an approved centre for the Learning Disabilities Award Framework (LDAF). This has been dome through BILD (British institute of Learning Disabilities), who have undertaken the internal verifying. All new staff undertake this training, which should then lead onto NVQ training. The LDAF training takes approximately 6 months to complete. The home has continued to develop it’s “train the trainers “ work and it is planned they will eventually have their own trainers amongst the staff team in food handling, first aid and also the managing of challenging behaviours, which is currently provided by the Studio Three organisation. One person has successfully completed the medication training and can now provide this to the care staff. Service users were observed being supported by care staff and there appeared to be a reasonably calm atmosphere in the home during the time of this visit. One service user commented that the, “staff treat me nice” and also that they “had a good key-worker”. Other service users appeared comfortable with staff and were observed making their needs and wishes known. Staff generally felt well supported by the management and were positive about the changes that were being implemented. Some formal supervision has been a little infrequent but all new staff stated they appreciated the input and support they were receiving during their induction period. The Group Manager has had regular input and involvement with the staff and people stated that this had been very positive, both in terms of improving practice and explaining the progress that the Provider wishes to make. Staff Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 commented that a greater emphasis on consistency and routine was helping them to better meet the needs of the service users. Some reservations were expressed by staff about “team working”, with some people concerned about the consistency of the whole team but several staff commented upon the “improved team processes” and that they felt more comfortable within the current staff team. Several staff commented that they felt they could receive more and improved input on the subject of Autistic Spectrum Disorders, particularly during the induction period. This issue was being addressed by the Training Manager, who was in the process of accessing some more specialist training in this area, to be delivered through the induction process. It was also explained that a member of the Community Learning Disabilities Team will be providing some training on autism to the staff team. The home has had more regular staff meetings over the past three months and also the structure and content of handover meetings has been improved. Staff commented that these meetings, which often are attended by the Group Manager, have helped with staff morale and also improved understanding of the developments being made and what the future expectations are. Feedback form parents and relatives commented upon the inconsistency of communication from the staff in relation to the care and progress of service users. Whilst it was stated that there had been an improvement in this area over recent months, this progress needs to be sustained over a period of time to gain the full confidence of some of the parents. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Improvements in the administration and monitoring have led to more effective management in the home. The Registered Manager needs to have more ownership of the leadership and direction of the home in order to sustain and build upon the progress made since the previous inspection. Regulation 26 inspections and regular input and guidance from the Group Manager contribute to a good standard of quality assurance. EVIDENCE: The home has circulated its own surveys to the relatives of service users and the majority have responded. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 The Group Manager has been undertaking unannounced Regulation 26 visits. Copies of these reports have been supplied to the Commission and have provided a number of action points for the management of the home to address. Some slowness in responding to these from the Management has resulted in the Group Manager taking a more pro-active role in the home. The reports appear detailed and have been undertaken at different times of the day, and also at weekends. Staff were positive about this input. The week prior to the inspection the home was inspected by the Environmental Health Department. The home were yet to receive a report but the Provider stated that no serious concerns were identified. The Provider undertook to supply a copy of the final report when they receive it. The Provider is in the process of making another application to be accredited by the National Autistic Society. It is evident that the Provider has made progress in all the areas that were required as a result of previous inspections. The main initiatives being implemented by the management over the previous months appear to be the challenging of practice issues and performance of staff, the closer monitoring and support for staff, the new staff rota that was being started the week following the inspection, and the increased training input that is being provided. The managing and movement of one service user into new accommodation, has also been a significant area of work. However, the direction and leadership over these issues has been provided by the Group Manager, rather than the Registered Manager. The Provider needs to ensure that the Registered Manager can fulfil and perform the function and role of leadership to the staff team in relation to standards of care practice. This is required in order for the home to sustain the progress, and build on, the changes implemented so far. Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 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 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 2 x 3 X 3 X X 3 x Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 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 YA37 Regulation 8 Requirement The Provider must ensure that the Registered Manager can fulfil and perform the role in terms of leadership and direction for the staff team Timescale for action 30/04/07 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard YA7 Good Practice Recommendations The home should access an advocate for one service user identified in the report Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Gloucester Office Unit 1210 Lansdowne Court Gloucester Business Park Brockworth Gloucester, GL3 4AB 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 Matson House DS0000016500.V314170.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!