Inspection on 19/12/05 for Mimosa

This inspection was carried out on 19th December 2005.

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

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report. These are things the inspector asked to be changed, but found they had not done. The inspector also made 3 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Mimosa 29/08/07

Mimosa 27/06/06

Mimosa 20/06/05

Similar services:

Polesworth Group Friary Road

Polesworth Group Pooley Heights

Polesworth Group 32 Station Road

Polesworth Group 70 Long Street

Breme

Polesworth Group 64 Long Street

Polesworth Group 68 Long Street

10 Whitfield Avenue

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Mimosa 4 Shirley Road Hanley Stoke on Trent Staffordshire ST1 4DT Lead Inspector Jane Capron Unannounced Inspection 19th December 2005 09:00 Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Mimosa Address 4 Shirley Road Hanley Stoke on Trent Staffordshire ST1 4DT 01782 208590 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) Delam Care Ltd Mrs Pauline Adams Care Home 5 Category(ies) of Learning disability (5), Mental disorder, registration, with number excluding learning disability or dementia (5) of places Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 20th June 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Mimosa is a residential care home providing 24 hour care for five people with a learning disability and mental health concerns. The accommodation provides for one double and the rest single bedrooms. The home has a lounge and separate dining room and there is a small garden area at the rear. The home has bathing and shower facilities. There is no on site parking. The home shares the use of two people carriers with other care homes in the vicinity owned by the same company. The home is located close to Hanley park and in the area there are some local shops. A short distance away there are other amenities such as medical services, a hairdresser and leisure facilities. Residents attend a local college for a number of sessions a week and join with service users from the neighbouring care home to go out on trips and on holiday. Service users are involved in day to day activities associated with running the home including ensuring their bedrooms are tidy and clean and with such tasks as washing up, laying the table and shopping. The home has a staffing level of one care staff on at any time. The Care Manager has the responsibility for the care home next door. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection took place over a three-hour period. Discussions were held with four of the five residents. All the communal areas were seen as well as some of the bedroom accommodation. A sample of residents’ documentation was examined as well as the procedure for administering medication and for managing residents’ finances. A discussion was held with the staff member on duty and the Care Manager. Since the last inspection there has been no complaints made and no additional visits have been made. What the service does well: Mimosa provided residents with a homely and supportive environment. Four of the five residents had lived at the home for a number of years. The residents liked living at the home and got on well with each other. The residents said they liked the staff and felt that the provided them with the help they needed. The home had developed good support plans. The plans covered the health care, personal care and educational and occupational needs of the residents. Residents were involved in the reviewing of their care plans. The residents’ views were sought with the home having individual discussions as well as house meetings. These meetings provided residents with the opportunity to express any concerns and to be involved in deciding on day-today issues associated with running the home. Residents were able to have a say about the meals served being involved in planning the meals. Residents had the opportunity to help with the food shopping. They were also encouraged to develop their independent living skills through helping out with a range of domestic tasks. The residents had the choice to attend college with one resident attending every day whilst the other residents attended less often. Courses covered such areas as cookery and art and drama. The home supported residents to have their health care needs met. They attended the doctor when needed, had eye and dental checks and received nail care from a chiropodist. Those that required psychiatric services were supported to receive it. Residents received medical and medication reviews. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 Residents were having their medication needs met. The residents that self medicated had been assessed and had a lockable facility in their bedrooms in which to keep their medication. The staff had received the necessary induction and mandatory training. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Whilst the home was close to meeting all the standards there remained a few issues that required to be addressed. Whilst risk assessments were in place for residents’ ability to manage hot surfaces, radiators, particularly those in bathrooms, that could cause a hazard needed to be covered. There was some decorating that was outstanding including two of the bedrooms and the dining room. The stairs carpet needed replacing, as it would soon become a hazard to residents. The home was not able to give access to the staff records. Therefore it could not be evidenced that the home had responded to a previous requirement to undertake all the pre –employment checks. Therefore the requirement made at the last inspection remains. It is also recommended that the staff undertake training in infection control and training that is accredited under the learning disability framework. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 7 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. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 2,3,5 The home’s assessment processes identified residents’ needs and wishes. The support provided by the staff and the involvement of appropriate of health care services was meeting the needs of residents with low level needs. The home’s contracts ensured that residents were made aware of their rights and responsibilities. EVIDENCE: Residents have been assessed prior to moving into the home. There has only been one resident admitted recently. All others have lived at the home for a number of years. The most recently admitted resident was subject to an assessment of their needs. The assessment included their health and personal care needs, occupational and educational needs as well as family contact and financial needs. Residents felt that the staff supported them well and provided any assistance needed. They confirmed that staff assisted them with any personal care tasks they required and took them to see the doctor and to any out patient appointments. The staff had the necessary knowledge of the residents to provide the support they needed. Staff received induction training as well as training relevant to their role. The home supported residents to access general Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 and mental health care services and had working relationships with health professionals. All residents had a contract provided by the home and by the sponsoring authority. The contract covered the room they were to occupy as well as the service to be provided. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 6,7,8 The care planning process, that included the residents, provided the necessary information for staff to be able to support residents to have their needs and wishes met. The residents benefited from making choices over their lives and actively participated in a range of tasks associated with running the home. . EVIDENCE: A sample of two support plans was examined. This demonstrated that the home had developed good support plans that fully identified the needs of the residents. They included health (general and psychiatric), personal care, educational and occupational needs as well as domestic and financial budgeting. Residents were involved in the care planning process and in the internal reviews. There was evidence that some placements had been reviewed through multi agency reviews. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 Residents were involved in a range of household tasks. They stated that they kept their bedrooms clean, vacuumed communal rooms, did the weekly food shop and planned the menu. These tasks were shown in their support plans and on their weekly schedules. Residents had monthly meetings where household issues were discussed as well as deciding on activities and trips out. The meeting was also an opportunity to raise any concerns they had. All residents were involved in budgeting their finances. They went to the bank either independently or with staff support. On the day of the inspection a service user went to the bank. Discussions with residents confirmed that they were provided with choices. They chose how to spend their money and whether they wanted to take part in activities. They could choose when to get up and go to bed. They were involved in choosing meals. Staff were able to describe how residents were assisted to make choices. Decisions taken by residents were respected with one resident explaining the activities he liked and stating that he was not expected to take part in activities he did not like. Residents chose whether to go to college and which courses to take. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 The home provided residents with a varied lifestyle with opportunities to take part in educational and social activities in and out of the home. The residents were supported to maintain and develop relationships with relatives and friends. The home had a homely and relaxed atmosphere where residents could enjoy relaxed routines and make choices over their daily lives. EVIDENCE: The residents benefited from a range of educational and worthwhile activities. All the residents attended courses at college. One resident chose to attend every day whilst others attended less often. All spoken to said they enjoyed attending. The courses attended included art and drama, cookery, jewellery making, and flower arranging. Residents additionally assisted around the home and went shopping. One resident attended church and several attended the Dolphin club. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 Residents stated that they regularly went out of the home. Several went shopping regularly, they all attended health services in the community and went to the bank. Several went out to the pub and went out to use leisure facilities including the theatre. The residents had access to transport and they contributed towards the cost. In order to support residents to access the community the home was able to alter its staffing levels with the Care Manager or an additional staff member supervising residents to enable the staff member to go out with residents. The home welcomed visitors at any reasonable time. Residents had contact with relatives and friends. Several of the residents had close relationships with residents living at the home next door and they would visit each other and often go out together. The home was aware of the residents rights to intimate relationships and was aware of issues that may arise from these relationships. The home had a homely, relaxed atmosphere. Residents said that they got on well together and provided examples of how they supported each other. Residents would look out for each other and would help another resident if necessary. The home’s routines were quite relaxed. Residents stated that were able to get up and go to bed when they wanted. They said they could go to their bedrooms when they wanted or could use the communal rooms, apart from the kitchen, at any time. Residents spent time talking together and there was ongoing chatting between the staff member and residents. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 19,20,21 The health care needs of the residents were being met with evidence of multi agency work taking place. The home’s medication procedures was ensuring that the residents were receiving the necessary medication to meet their health care needs. The needs of residents relating to ageing were being dealt with by the home. EVIDENCE: Residents confirmed that they attended for health care appointments. A sample of two care plans showed that residents went to the GP when necessary and had medical and medication reviews. Observation of residents showed that they received nail care. Residents stated that this was either done by the staff or by the chiropodist. Residents said that they had eye checks and attended the dentist. The residents that needed it had psychiatric intervention and were supported by staff to attend for outpatient appointments. The residents had received the flu injection. Residents also received routine health screening. The home involved the continence nurse as appropriate. The weight of residents was being monitored. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 All residents received medication and those that self medicated had the necessary assessment. The residents were provided with a lockable cabinet in which to keep their medication. One resident spoken to was able to explain his medication routine. The medication of two residents was examined. The records were kept accurately and the medication corresponded with the records. Staff had received medication training and the Care Manager had assessed staff’s ability to administer medication correctly. The home was aware of needs relating to ageing and had links with health care staff. The residents’ wishes over funeral planning and the provision of wills had been discussed. The home would support residents to remain in the home as long as they could continue to meet their needs. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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, 23 The home’s complaints procedure provided residents with a method to express their concerns and to have them responded to. The home’s adult protection procedures along with the training of staff should increase the level of protection for the residents. EVIDENCE: The home had a complaints procedure that was displayed in the home. Residents stated that they felt able to raise any concerns with staff and they believed that the staff would resolve any issues. The home maintained a record of complaints. No complaints had been received by the home or the CSCI since the last inspection. The home has in the past used advocates to support residents. The home had a procedure for responding to concerns over adult protection and staff had received training in issues relating to adult protection. Residents spoken to stated that they felt safe in the home. The home had procedures in place for safeguarding residents’ finances. The examination of records showed that the home was keeping records of expenditure. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 24,26,27,28,29 The home was generally well maintained but there were some rooms that if decorated would provide residents with a good standard of accommodation throughout. The residents benefited from lockable bedrooms that were satisfactorily furnished and that provided adequate space for their possessions. The home’s communal areas provided residents with suitable accommodation where they could eat their meals and relax. The home’s provided a suitable number toilet and bathroom facilities to meet the needs of the residents and that provided them with privacy. EVIDENCE: The home was located close to Hanley Park and the local college. There were health services and shops within a short walking distance. The centre of Hanley was a twenty-minute walk away. The home was in keeping with surrounding properties. The home was generally satisfactorily maintained and decorated but their remained several rooms (two bedrooms and the dining room) that Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 needed to be decorated to provide the residents with homely accommodation of a good standard throughout the home. Since the last inspection the dining room carpet had been replaced. The stairs carpet needed replacing as it was close to becoming a hazard to the residents. The home provided one double room and three single rooms. One of the single bedrooms was downstairs. The residents occupying the double room had done so for many years and said that were happy to continue to do so. The bedrooms seen, were well personalised and had TV and a facility on which to play music. Although bedrooms did not have TV aerial points, residents said that their TV had a good picture. Bedrooms had a lockable facility and the bedroom door was lockable. Residents decided whether to have a key and an assessment relating to the holding of keys was on file. The home had suitable bathing and toilet facilities. Downstairs there was a shower room with toilet and upstairs a bathroom with toilet and a separate toilet. All were lockable. The home provided a communal lounge that was suitably decorated and furnished. This provided a homely place for residents to sit. The home had a separate dining room. There was a domestic style kitchen and a small laundry that was shared with the home next door. Most of the residents did not need any specialist equipment but here needed the home had provided appropriate equipment including an upright chair, which was used by one resident. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 32,33,35 The residents were supported by staff that had received training and that were undertaking NVQ training. The home had sufficient staffing to encourage, prompt and to provide general supervision and support to the residents. EVIDENCE: The residents spoke highly of the staff. They felt them to be supportive and said that they got on well with them. The residents felt that the staff helped them when necessary and went with them to the health services. The level of skill and knowledge varied between the staff with some having worked in care for some time whilst others had less experience. The staff on duty were aware of the needs of the residents. One of the staff at the home had achieved NVQ level 3 and two others were undertaking NVQ2. The company provided a range of training and staff were expected to undertake the training relevant to their role. The staff member on duty had received training in health and safety, food hygiene, managing aggression, first aid, adult protection and medication. He had attended college to undertake induction training and was undertaking NVQ2. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 The home was able to provide low-level support with one staff member on duty throughout the day. An additional staff member or the Care Manager provided support to enable a staff member to go out with a resident. On occasions a staff member from the home and a staff member form the home next door went out with residents from both homes. The home had no waking night staff but had a staff member that slept at the home. The home had staff of both genders. The staff files were not accessible during the inspection therefore this inspection was not able to confirm that the omissions seen at the last inspection had been rectified. Therefore the requirement made at the last inspection will be carried forward to this inspection. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 41,42,43, The home was maintaining the necessary records to both safeguard the residents and to ensure the effective running of the home. The homes’ health and safety procedures were in the main protecting the residents but the home still needed to ensure radiators that could present a hazard were covered. The residents were benefiting from a home that had effective management and management procedures in place. EVIDENCE: The Care Manager had been in post for several years. She had the necessary skills, knowledge and qualifications to effectively manage the home. She undertook periodic training to maintain her knowledge. She had the responsibility to ensure the home met the necessary legislation and standards. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 The home maintained the necessary records relating to the care provided and for the running of the business. The home maintained records relating to accidents and complaints. Records were maintained over health care and nursing treatments and over the medication taken by residents. Files were up to date and were kept securely. Records were being kept over the servicing of equipment and over fire prevention checks. The home had health and safety procedures in place. The staff had received training in health and safety, fire, first aid, moving and handling and food hygiene. Checks were being made on fire safety including fire alarms and emergency lighting. The home had eight fire drills during 2005. The home had procedures in place for the storing and use of hazardous substances. Checks were maintained over the temperature of water. Risk assessments had been completed over residents’ ability to manage hot surfaces and hot water. The home did still need to cover radiators in high-risk places such as bathrooms. Accidents were being recorded. The company monitored the financial management of the home. The Care Manager had responsibility for the budget for household items. The company paid for the cost of maintenance, decorating and the replacements of items of furniture. The proprietor was undertaking regulation 26 visits. The home had the necessary insurance cover in place. Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 3 4 X 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 2 25 X 26 3 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 X STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 2 33 3 34 2 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 4 3 3 X X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 4 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 X PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score X 3 3 X 3 X X X 3 2 3 Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? yes STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA24 Regulation 23(2)(d) Requirement Timescale for action 01/04/06 2. 3. YA34 YA42 19(1)(b) (i) 13(4)(c) To ensure that the all parts of the home are reasonably decorated: i. that the dining room be decorated ii. That the torn stairs carpet is replaced iii. That the double bedroom be decorated (previous timescale not met) v. That the back bedroom upstairs be decorated in a suitable style (Previous timescale not met) That all pre- employment checks 13/12/05 be made To ensure that radiators in high 01/02/06 risk areas e.g. bathrooms are covered. (Previous timescale not met). Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 26 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 YA35 YA42 Good Practice Recommendations To consider training that is learning disability award accredited. To provide staff with training in infection control Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Stafford Office Dyson Court Staffordshire Technology Park Beaconside Stafford ST18 0ES 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 Mimosa DS0000064017.V274199.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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!