Inspection on 29/08/06 for Meadoway Homes

This inspection was carried out on 29th August 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is (sorry - unknown). 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 4 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Meadoway Homes 19/01/09

Meadoway Homes 06/02/05

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Meadoway Homes 613 Barking Road Plaistow London E13 9EZ Lead Inspector Seka Graovac Unannounced Inspection 29th August 2006 09:50 Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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 Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Meadoway Homes Address 613 Barking Road Plaistow London E13 9EZ 0208 257 8183 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) Meadoway Homes Ltd Mr Doubt Ndebele Care Home 4 Category(ies) of Mental disorder, excluding learning disability or registration, with number dementia (4) of places Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: None Date of last inspection 6th February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: The home is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection to provide accommodation, care and support service to up to four people of either gender with history of mental health difficulties and high care support needs. The premises are situated in East London, Plaistow area on a busy road, close to public transport and other amenities such as Afro-Caribbean Community Centre and West Ham Stadium. Parking is not restricted on the nearby roads. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The home was registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection in September 2005. The inspector attempted to inspect it for the first time in February 2006, but without success: the home was not operational and did not have any service users. This inspection was unannounced and lasted approximately four and a half hours. The main aim of the inspection was to assess the service in accordance with the key National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Younger People and related legislation. The home had one permanent service user and one using the service on a trial basis. The inspector spent some time with the service users individually and spoke to both of them. The home did not employ any staff at the time of the inspection. The person who was on duty worked through an Agency. The inspector spent some time speaking to her. The Responsible Individual and the Registered Manager arrived later in the morning. The inspector had the opportunity to speak to both of them as part of the inspection process. She also gave them the feedback at the end of the inspection. The inspector viewed various documents, such as: service users’ individual files, duty roster, medication records, fire-safety records, etc. The inspector saw all the areas of the home, apart from two bedrooms that were occupied. What the service does well: The Registered Manager had many years of experience in mental health field. He had been registered with the Commission to manage two other homes in Newham, previously. He was qualified both in nursing (RMN) and management (National Vocational Qualification level 4, Registered Manager Award). The Responsible Individual had eight years of management experience and three years in the care field. Both individuals were motivated to provide good quality service that is culturally sensitive and promotes development of daily living skills, confidence and psychological stability. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 As the home was trying to establish itself, the management was very pleased to inform the inspector that the Meadoway has been recently included on the Newham Social Services preferred providers list. The home’s admission procedure was thorough. Comprehensive information relating to the service users’ mental health history written by various health and social care professionals and the home’s own assessment of care and support needs were available on their files. The inspector also saw a copy of the letter sent by the Manager to the service users, inviting them to visit and stay at the home for a day and a weekend prior to making a decision about moving into the Meadoway. The introductory visits did take place and were recorded. Information regarding breakdown of fees were available in both files. The permanent service user had signed the contract with the home and the social services. The inspector’s observations of the staff and the service users’ interactions, as well as her conversations with the service users indicated that their personal autonomy and independence were encouraged. The property is a Victorian conversion, spacious and with high ceilings and the garden at the back of the house. The home is well furnished with new and comfortable furniture. The carpets were new, soft and clean. The whole environment was well maintained and clean at the time of the inspection. There is a kitchen, a large dining area/ lounge, one shower with WC on the ground floor and two bedrooms. Upstairs there is another lounge, two bedrooms, two bathrooms with toilet facilities and a small office. The building is a non-smoking environment. A beautiful wood-cabin was erected in the garden to provide comfortable and sheltered smoking facilities. What has improved since the last inspection? No standards were assessed at the previous inspection. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 What they could do better: Four requirements and one recommendation were made at this inspection. The Registered Person(s) must ensure that: • • all packages of perishable food are dated when opened a copy of Protection of Vulnerable Adults procedure from Newham is available in the home and also that the home’s own procedure is amended so that it includes referrals without delay to Newham Adult Safeguarding officers who would then advise on the course of action. The inspector also recommended that the service user’s identified pattern of making generalised allegations be discussed with the multidisciplinary team at the forthcoming reviews and also with the Newham’s Safeguarding Officers and that the decisions be recorded monitoring visits to take place on a monthly basis. The subsequently produced reports must be made available to the Manager of the home and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. there is a policy in place that would ensure implementation of effective quality assurance and monitoring. • • The home did not have any permanent support staff, so the inspector was unable to make a judgement on this aspect of the service. 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. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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 Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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): 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home’s admission procedure enhanced service users’ ability to choose. The assessment procedure was thorough. EVIDENCE: The home had two service users at the time of the inspection. One of them lived at the Meadoway on a permanent basis. He previously lived in a different care home. The other service user was trying the home out after spending significant time at the hospital. The inspector viewed the individual files for both service users. Comprehensive information relating to their mental health history written by various health and social care professionals and the home’s own assessment of care and support needs were available on their files. The inspector also saw a copy of the letter sent by the Manager to the service users, inviting them to visit and stay at the home for a day and a weekend prior to making a decision about moving into the Meadoway. The visits did take place and were recorded. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Information regarding breakdown of fees were available in both files. The permanent service user had signed the contract with the home and the social services. The inspector was given a copy of the home’s brochure and also viewed the Statement of Purpose and Service User’s Guide. The documents were well written and comprehensive. The inspector discussed with the Manager how certain things about the service could be made more explicit. As the home was trying to establish itself, the management was very pleased to inform the inspector that the Meadoway has been recently included on the Newham Social Services preferred providers list. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 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): 6, 7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home was committed to promoting service users’ choice and independence in accordance with their individual needs and risk assessments. EVIDENCE: The permanent service user had personal plan that was based on the assessment of his needs and risks. Comprehensive and current written information was available in his file. The other service user had a short care plan that was not developed by the home. The home was using this document and the other written information about this person’s needs and potential risks to support him while in the process of developing a personal plan for him. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 The inspector’s observations of the staff and the service users’ interactions, as well as her conversations with the service users indicated that they were well looked after and that their personal autonomy was encouraged. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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 and 17. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home supported service users to lead active lives and encouraged their independence. Plenty of food was available but the home did not date the opened packages of perishable food. EVIDENCE: The permanent service user had a weekly activities plan agreed. A copy was displayed in the office and another one was available in his file. It showed that he wanted to lead active and independent lifestyle. He independently went to the Mosque every day and also regularly prayed at home. He talked with the inspector about his religious practice. He ate halal meals. He recently went to visit Africa where he was born and used to live. The inspector was told that that the service user organised the whole trip himself, actually without the home’s knowledge. He had close relationships with his brothers. Correspondence with the job-centre and Department for Work and Pension was available on his file. He told the inspector that he preferred to live in his own flat and went to the homeless centre, but couldn’t get the flat from them due Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 to having a place of abode. The home was situated very close to AfroCaribbean Centre and the service user went to the Somali café on his own accord. The other service user was a great supporter of West Ham football team. He showed their paraphernalia that he had to the inspector. He was very pleased that the home was located in the walking distance from the West Ham stadium. He also told the inspector that he enjoyed shopping and was looking forward to going out with the staff on that day to buy some towels that he wanted. He told the inspector where his parents lived and that they loved him. He was hoping to find a girlfriend soon. He belonged to the Church of England and also talked about his believes with the inspector. However, he stated that he did not want to go to church. One service user had already had his breakfast before the inspector arrived. The inspector sat with the other service user while he had the serial of his choice and had a cup of tea with him. In addition to a large sunflowersarrangement that was on the dining table, two bowls were kept on it as well. The large one contained fresh fruit and the small one had individually wrapped cakes in it. The fridge/freezer was full of food including fresh vegetables. The inspector noted that opened packages of perishable food were not dated and made a requirement in respect to that. The Registered Person(s) must ensure that all packages of perishable food are dated when opened. There was a large screen TV in the lounge and the service users told the inspector that they enjoyed watching it. The Responsible Individual stated that an engineer was due to come and fit the Sky programmes. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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 and 20. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home appropriately supported service users’ wellbeing and health in accordance with their needs. EVIDENCE: Service users appeared well at the time of the inspection. One service user expressed some delusions of religious nature, but his mental state was stable, well managed by the medication and support given in the home. Both service users were registered with General Practitioners. One service user was expecting a consultant psychiatrist to visit him on the day of the inspection. This person’s file also contained correspondence with the Eyehospital as he had lost vision in one of his eyes. The inspector checked the medicine kept by the home on behalf of the service users and associated records and found no discrepancies. The Manager helped the service users to fill their weekly doset-boxes and updated medication stock records on a weekly basis. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 The service users were independent in maintaining their personal hygiene. The staff told the inspector though that they had to be reminded and encouraged to change their clothes at times. One service user was having a bath when the inspector arrived. He did come to the office to ask the staff to help him to secure his braces to the trousers. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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 and 23. Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home needed to further develop the Protection of Vulnerable Adults procedure and embrace more transparent multidisciplinary approach to safeguarding service users and staff. EVIDENCE: The home’s complaints procedure was included in the Service User’s Guide. Appropriate timescales were discussed with the Manager at the inspection. The Manager stated that there have been no complaints raised with the home. The inspector also viewed the home’s Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) procedure. According to it, allegations would be investigated by the management of the home. The inspector explained at the inspection why this would not always be appropriate. She asked the Registered Manager to obtain a copy of POVA procedure from Newham and also required that the home’s own procedure is amended so that it includes referrals without delay to Newham Adult Safeguarding officers who would then advise on the course of action. One service user was very satisfied with his experience of the home and made only positive comments in his conversations with the inspector. The other service user told the inspector that he was very unhappy at Meadoway because the staff were “horrible and tortured” him all the time. However, he did not say anything more about it, but asked if the inspector could help him to get his own flat. He actually seemed well and contented and walked around the home with confidence. The inspector did not find any evidence to substantiate his Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 allegations. The Registered Manager stated that although the service user continued to make generalised allegations, he never provided any details in relation to them. The Manager said that it seemed that the service user believed that his at times challenging behaviour and allegations would help him to get a flat. Nevertheless, the inspector recommended that the identified pattern of making allegations be discussed with the multidisciplinary team at the forthcoming reviews and also with the Newham’s Safeguarding Officers and that the decisions be recorded. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home was spacious, comfortably furnished and clean. EVIDENCE: The property is a Victorian conversion, spacious and with high ceilings and the garden at the back of the house. It is situated on Barking Road close to public transport and other facilities such as: Afro-Caribbean Community Centre and West Ham Football Stadium. The home is well furnished with new and comfortable furniture. The carpets were new, soft and clean. The whole environment was well maintained and clean at the time of the inspection. There is a kitchen, a large dining area/ lounge, one shower with WC on the ground floor and two bedrooms. Upstairs there is another lounge, two bedrooms, two bathrooms with toilet facilities and a small office. The building is non-smoking environment. A beautiful wood-cabin was erected in the garden to provide comfortable and sheltered smoking facilities. The Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Registered Person(s) stated that the premises including the cabin were inspected by the Fire Authority and deemed as meeting fire-safety standards. The inspector observed the service users walking freely around the house and the garden with confidence and ease. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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): The inspector was unable to make a judgement on this aspect of the service. The home did not have any permanent support staff. The continuity of provision was secured by using agency staff on a regular basis. EVIDENCE: There was one support staff on duty when the inspector took place. She worked through an agency. She told the inspector that she has been coming to work at Meadoway for a last couple of months on a regular basis. The duty roster was displayed on the wall in the office indicating that there was always one staff on duty. The management staff were available in addition to that. The Registered Person(s) told the inspector that they used one particular agency. Now, when they started receiving and accepting referrals, they would be recruiting permanent staff, the inspector was told. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 and 42. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The management of the home was experienced and motivated to establish a good service. Requirements were made in relation to Provider’s Reports and Quality Assurance. EVIDENCE: The company had three Directors, one of whom was the Responsible Individual for the Meadoway care home. The Registered Manager had many years of experience in mental health field. He had been registered with the Commission to manage two other homes in Newham, previously. He was qualified both in nursing (RMN) and management (National Vocational Qualification level 4, Registered Manager Award). The Responsible Individual had eight years of management experience and three years in the care field. Both individuals were motivated to provide good quality Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 service that is culturally sensitive and promotes development of daily living skills, confidence and psychological stability. The Responsible Individual closely monitored the home’s activity as it tried to establish itself on the care market. The inspector was told that the Directors met in a week prior to the inspection and would continue to monitor and review the home’s performance. Although the Responsible Individual was closely involved in the running of the home, Regulation 26 reports were not available for inspection and the related requirement was made. Another requirement was made regarding lack of Quality Assurance policy that would show how the home would monitor the quality of its provision. The health and safety in the home was well managed. The poster giving required contact details was conspicuously displayed in the office. The environment was safe. The risk assessments were available. The portable electrical appliances were tested this year. The smoking alarms were tested on a weekly basis and this was recorded. Two fire-drills were logged. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 2 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 X 33 X 34 X 35 X 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 2 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 2 X X 3 X Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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 YA17 Regulation 16 Requirement The Registered Person(s) must ensure that all packages of perishable food are dated when opened. The Registered Person(s) must ensure that a copy of POVA procedure from Newham is available in the home and also that the home’s own procedure is amended so that it includes referrals without delay to Newham Adult Safeguarding officers who would then advise on the course of action. The Registered provider must arrange for monitoring visits to take place on a monthly basis. The subsequently produced reports must be made available to the Manager of the home and the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The Registered Person(s) must ensure that there is a policy in place that would ensure implementation of effective quality assurance and DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 30/09/06 2. YA23 13 30/09/06 3. YA39 26 30/09/06 4. YA39 24 31/10/06 Meadoway Homes Version 5.2 Page 26 monitoring. 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 YA23 Good Practice Recommendations The inspector recommended that the service user’s pattern of making allegations be discussed with the multidisciplinary team at the forthcoming reviews and also with the Newham’s Safeguarding Officers and that the decisions be recorded. Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection East London Area Office Ferguson House 113 Cranbrook Road Ilford IG1 4PU 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 Meadoway Homes DS0000064132.V309549.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!