Inspection on 22/11/06 for Neville Court

This inspection was carried out on 22nd November 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Excellent. 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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Neville Court 01/03/06

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Neville Court Neville Avenue Kendray Barnsley South Yorkshire S70 3HF Lead Inspector Mrs Jayne Barnett-Middleton. Key Unannounced Inspection 22nd November 2006 10:30 Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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 Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Neville Court Address Neville Avenue Kendray Barnsley South Yorkshire S70 3HF 01709 565822 01709 565 824 none 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) Barnsley Healthcare Ltd Mrs Winnie (Mawarire Nee) Chitanda Care Home 20 Category(ies) of Mental disorder, excluding learning disability or registration, with number dementia (20), Physical disability (20) of places Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. One service user as identified on the variation application dated 30.11.05, may be accommodated at the home. 1st March 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Neville Court is a purpose built home providing care for people with physical and mental disabilities. The ground floor accommodates the entrance area, a visitor’s lounge and a physiotherapy room. The upper two levels are the Bretton and Cannon suites; each wing accommodates 10 people. The wings are spacious and can accommodate wheelchair users; there are two lounges and a dining area on both wings. The bedrooms are purpose built; they are spacious and include en-suite facilities. There is access to all levels by stairs or passenger lift. There are security keypads to doors and the lift for the residents’ safety. The home stands in its own grounds, with gardens and parking space. It is well located to access local shops and pubs and there is public transport close by. The home is situated in the Kendray area of Barnsley; it has easy access to the town, collage, and leisure facilities. The fees for care offered at the home at 22/11/06 are from £800 to £2.200 per week. The homes statement of purpose, service user guide and complaints procedure are displayed within the entrance of the home and are in appropriate formats. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was a key unannounced visit conducted by Jayne Barnett-Middleton. Prior to the inspection contacts made to The Commission For Social Care Inspection, the homes service history; Regulation 26 visits and a pre-inspection questionnaire were examined. A fieldwork visit took place from 10.30 am until 17.30pm. Opportunity was taken to make a tour of the premises, inspect a sample of records including care plans, quality audits and staff recruitment files. The inspector spoke in detail to the manager and ten of the staff on duty about their knowledge, skills and experiences of working at the home. It was not possible to formally talk to most residents at the home on the day due to their high support needs. However, the inspector was able to observe the care provided and interactions between the staff and residents. One resident was able to talk about their views on aspects of living at the home. The inspector wishes to thank the manager, staff and residents for their welcome and assistance throughout the inspection process. What the service does well: The home has a positive, friendly and welcoming atmosphere. The manager and all staff appeared committed to providing the best care possible for the residents. All staff were eager to talk to the inspector of their role and were proud of their achievements. The staff team were keen to ensure that they were able to meet the residents’ needs. Detailed assessments were conducted and where possible trial visits were offered to prospective residents prior to their admission. The staff described how they also provided 1 to 1 support to residents during their initial days at the home, to enable them to gain a clear understanding of their care needs. A book was available for visitors to record any concerns or compliments. Many compliments had been received from relatives and visiting professionals’ compliments included “ A very warm welcome, the staff are polite and there is a nice atmosphere”, “ Staff are friendly, helpful and very good” and “ Thank you for your caring and professional support”. A good choice of menu was offered which was varied and nutritious. On the day a choice of three main courses was offered, although the cook said that any individual requests would also be catered for. Meal times were flexible to the needs of the residents. The lunchtime meal served was well presented and looked appetising. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Excellent training and development opportunities are available for the staff. The manager was keen to ensure that all staff was clear of their role, responsibilities and the specific needs of the residents. The inspector noted that several staff, new to the home and the caring profession, had a very good knowledge of their role and how to care for residents. All records seen during the visit were detailed, up to date and very well organised. In particular the residents care plans were very informative and provided specific detail to ensure that all aspects of the residents care needs and preferences were met. Through discussions and observations it was evident that the manager and care manager were committed to providing a good quality of care to residents and were keen to ensure that all staff worked to a high standard. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 and 4. Quality in this outcome area is Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. Residents’ needs and aspirations were assessed prior to their admission and their individual needs were reflected in their plan of care. The admission process ensured that the service was appropriate and that the staff would be able to provide the care that the resident required. Trial visits were offered, where appropriate, for residents to the visit the home to meet the staff and residents prior to their admission. EVIDENCE: The care plans checked contained a detailed assessment that had been completed prior to the residents’ admission. The manager and staff at the home also visited prospective residents and carried out a detailed assessment. The manager spoke in detail of one resident who she had visited. During the assessment it was identified that the home did need to provide specialist equipment to enable the resident to bath safely and comfortably. The manager said that the equipment had been purchased prior to their admission. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 A key worker system was in place, which ensured that the residents received consistent support from a designated named worker. The manager confirmed that a provisional keyworker would be allocated prior to the residents’ admission. The manager said that soon after admission the resident would be consulted to see if they were happy with their named worker and to check that they had been made to feel welcome and at home. The staff said that they received detailed information about a resident prior to their admission. They described how they also provided 1 to 1 support to residents during their initial days at the home, to enable them to gain a clear understanding of their care needs. Weekly meetings were held to discuss the residents care needs and progress, ensuring that the residents changing needs were identified and enabling the staff to provide a consistent level of care. The manager said that she had recently visited a prospective resident and that a time for them to visit the home had been arranged. This would include a short visit to the home for a meal progressing to overnight and weekend stays. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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): 6,7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area is Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. All residents have individual care plans, which contained specific information about their care and support needs, enabling staff to provide the appropriate level of support. Residents are supported and encouraged by the staff team to make decisions about their lives promoting independence. Risk assessments have been developed, supporting residents to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 EVIDENCE: The care plans checked described the residents individual care needs. The format was very detailed and included the residents’ preferred daily routine, healthcare needs and emotional control enabling staff to provide the appropriate level of support. Care plans were reviewed at least monthly and where possible residents were involved in the planning of their care, enabling them to agree that it was a true reflection of their individual needs. Information in the plans was easy to find and the records seen were very well maintained. The staff had a very good knowledge of residents care needs and was able to describe in detail the residents individual plan of care. One resident was able to talk in detail about the care and support that they needed from the staff. Information provided by the resident in relation to their emotional and physical care was tracked and the information provided within the care plan was an accurate reflection of their care needs. Through discussions with the manager and staff, observation and from reading resident care plans it was evident that, where possible, residents were encouraged to make decisions about their lives. The staff had a very good knowledge of residents’ individual needs and was able to describe how they promoted choice for example promoting their preferred routine and choice of daily activities. One resident said that they were able to decide how they spent their day commenting, “ I can please myself”. Risk assessments had been developed for all residents, which identified the individual risks that were presented to residents on a daily basis. The risk assessments seen were very detailed giving realistic and practical measures to reduce any presented risks enabling residents to live safely and as independently as possible. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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 and 17. Quality in this outcome area is Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. Residents had regular opportunities to access age, peer and culturally appropriate activities enabling them to lead fulfilling lives outside as well as within the home. Residents were encouraged to maintain contact with their family and friends, enabling them to continue to be included in family life. A good choice of menu was offered and special dietary needs were catered for, promoting the resident’s health and wellbeing. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 EVIDENCE: Residents had good access to activities both within and outside the home. An activities coordinator was employed and a structured daily activity programme was in place. Activities included crafts, bingo; nail care and discussions about current news affairs. Regular trips were organised to local parks, cinemas, shopping centres and the coast. The care plan format detailed residents’ hobbies and interests and provided residents with the opportunity to discuss with their named worker any activities that they may like to do and any goals and aspirations that they may have. The manager said that one resident had requested a short break to Blackpool and this had been organised. The home has its own mini bus, which gave staff the flexibility to plan trips on a regular basis. Staffing levels ensured that residents with high support needs were able to receive the 1-1 support that they needed ensuring that all residents had equal choices to access activities. The manager and staff said that they received good support from the residents’ relatives. Relative meetings were held regularly and were well attended. A ‘ visitors’ room was available for residents to meet their relatives in private if they wished. The manager said that visitors who lived a long distance from the home were also invited to use the room for overnight stays if they wanted to spend more time with their relative. The manager said that several visitors were visiting the home to have lunch with their relative on Christmas day. The staff spoke in detail of how they were supporting one resident to purchase Christmas presents for their daughter. The care plans recorded the residents’ dietary needs, their food preferences and any eating difficulties that they may have. A good choice of menu was offered which was varied and nutritious. On the day a choice of three main courses was offered, although the cook said that any individual requests would also be catered for. Menus were available at the home for residents, staff and visitors to refer to. Meal times were flexible to the needs of the residents. The lunchtime meal served was well presented and looked appetising. The cook had a good knowledge of residents’ likes, dislikes and dietary needs and confirmed that menus were reviewed frequently based on the residents changing preferences. One resident said that they enjoyed the food offered commenting, “ there is a good choice”. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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 and 20. Quality in this outcome area is Good. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. Residents received personal support, which promoted their privacy, dignity and independence. Residents’ physical and emotional needs were met. The care plans contained detailed information about how the resident’s personal support could be met by staff in order to meet their individual needs A policy and procedure to ensure that staff adhered to the safe administration of medication was in place to protect residents from risk. The medication system was safe and well managed. EVIDENCE: Resident’s personal support needs and emotional needs were recorded in the individual plans checked and were very comprehensive. Records of healthcare appointments, the treatment offered and follow up action were maintained and demonstrated that residents have good access to a range of healthcare professionals. The staff said that they received very good support from healthcare professionals. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Positive and appropriate relationships were observed between the staff and residents. Throughout the visit the staff team were observed to treat residents with respect and in a manner that respected their privacy and dignity. A key worker system was in place, which ensured that the residents received consistent support from a designated named worker. The manager said that most residents had two named workers, which in general, ensured that a residents named worker was always on duty. Medication systems were very well organised. The home sought the residents consent to administer medication to them, and this was recorded in the individuals care plan. Medication records seen were very well maintained and the manager carried out regular medication audits to ensure that medication had been administered and signed for appropriately. There were detailed guidelines for all residents as to when P.R.N medication (medication to be administered when required) should be administered. The Medicines were securely stored and procedures were in place to safely administer controlled drugs. The manager said that only the qualified nurses were responsible for administering medication. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.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 and 23. Quality in this outcome area is Good. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. The complaints procedure was clear and accessible ensuring that any complaints would be listened to and dealt with appropriately. The homes adult protection policy and procedure promoted the protection of residents from harm or abuse. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection no complaints have been to the Commission For Social Care Inspection. One complaint made to the home had been dealt with by the manager and responsible individual and partially substantiated. The complaints procedure was on display and a book was available for visitors to record any concerns or compliments. All staff had received Abuse Awareness training. All staff spoken to had a good knowledge of the types of abuse that may occur and the action that they would take to protect the residents. One member of staff who had recently completed Adult Awareness training said that the training had been very good and useful. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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 Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. The home was very well maintained, odour free, well decorated and homely, promoting a comfortable and safe environment for residents. The home was very clean and the laundry area was appropriately equipped to meet the needs of the residents. EVIDENCE: The environment within the home was very clean, comfortable and homely. Residents were observed to move freely around the home and appeared relaxed in their environment. All communal areas and bedrooms were decorated to a good standard and furnishings were of a good quality. There were many homely touches of pictures and ornaments and it was evident that the manager and staff took pride in promoting a homely environment for residents to live. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The residents’ bedrooms were spacious and clean. Each bedroom had a television, radio and telephone. The manager said that where possible residents had been involved in choosing their bedroom and colour scheme. One resident said that they liked to spend time in their bedroom reading and talking to their pet budgie. The residents, with the support of their keyworker, had been encouraged to personalize their bedroom with pictures, ornaments and posters reflecting personal choice. A handyman was employed and a good programme of maintenance was in place, which included daily, weekly and monthly checks of the environment. Routine re-decorating of walls and paintwork was taking place, which promoted a well-maintained environment. All areas seen during the visit were very clean and tidy. The laundry facilities were clean and sited away from food preparation areas. Records were kept of cleaning schedules. These were well recorded and covered all aspects of the homes cleaning routines. Staff had signed the records and the managers checked the records regularly. Policies and procedures were in place to control the spread of infection. One member of staff said that they had recently received refresher training in M.R.S.A. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 and 35. Quality in this outcome area is Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. A good ratio of staff is provided ensuring that the general and specific needs of the residents are met. Excellent training and development opportunities are available for the staff. The staff are continuing to undertake a National Vocational Qualification, which will ensure that the home achieves the target of 50 . The home operated a robust recruitment procedure that promoted the protection of the residents Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 EVIDENCE: There is a real positive atmosphere at the home. The manager and staff were professional and knowledgeable about the residents’ needs and preferences and were enthusiastic about their role and achievements. A good training and development programme was in place. Discussions with staff and records demonstrated that staff had received all mandatory training including fire, moving and health and safety. In addition to the required training, training specific to the needs of the resident was also provided for example Autism and Huntington’s disease awareness. A training matrix was in place, which demonstrated the training that the staff had received and when refresher training was due. Several staff that was relatively new at the home confirmed that they had received the appropriate level of support and induction, enabling them to safely care for residents, during their initial weeks of employment. The manager was keen to ensure that all staff was clear of their role, responsibilities and the specific needs of the residents. The inspector noted that several staff, new to the home and the caring profession, had a very good knowledge of their role and how to care for residents. The registered nurses held weekly training sessions. The manager said that the theme of the session depended on any identified areas of improvement at that time, for example risk assessments, specific health conditions and infection control. The manager confirmed that five of the staff team held a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) Level 2 in care and that several had enrolled to complete a NVQ level 3 qualification. Several care staff was in the process of completing a NVQ qualification. The manager said that the registered nurses had recently completed a management training course and that two registered nurses were in the process of enrolling for a NVQ Level 4 in management. The manager said that there were no staff vacancies. Four weeks staff rotas were checked and these evidenced that sufficient staff were employed to ensure that the individual needs of the residents could be met. The inspector noted that where residents were assessed as requiring 1 to 1 support this was being offered. Three staff files were checked, two of which were for staff that had recently commenced employment at the home. The files seen contained a range of information including three references, declaration of health and identification and qualifications. Staff employed had undertaken a Criminal Records Bureau and POVA check prior to them commencing employment at the home. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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 Excellent. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to the service. The residents and staff were benefiting from the organisation and leadership of the manager. The staff felt supported by the management team and good opportunities for them to discuss their work performance and personal development were in place. Forums were in place, which gave residents; relatives; staff and visiting professionals the opportunity to contribute to the development of the service. The homes policies and procedures promoted the health, safety and welfare of residents and staff. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 EVIDENCE: The home was very well managed. The manager and care manager have been in post since the home opened in June 2005. Both hold a nursing qualification and have completed a management qualification. Through discussions and observations it was evident that the manager and care manager were committed to providing a good quality of care to residents and were keen to ensure that all staff worked to a high standard. The registered manager and care manager had high standards and spent a lot of time with residents and observing staff to make sure care practices were good. Records demonstrated that meetings were held frequently. However, the manager dealt with any identified areas of improvements immediately, to ensure that consistent standards were maintained. The manager frequently visited the home during the night and at the weekends to ensure that all the staff worked to the same standard. The staff said that they received good support from the management team. Regular supervision and 1 –1 support was offered to staff and appraisals were conducted twice per year. Two recommendations made at the last visit had been met and no requirements were identified at this visit. The manager said that she had recently commenced training sessions with the staff to discuss National Minimum Standards and Care Home Regulations and Key Lines of Regulatory Assessment, to ensure that staff was aware of the standards that they needed to achieve. Regular staff, relative and residents meetings were held which enabled them to discuss and suggest ideas to develop the service. One relative had taken on the role of organising and chairing the meeting. Residents were invited to attend and one resident had been nominated as secretary. The manager said that the last meeting held had been very well attended and suggestions for Christmas activities had been made. There were excellent quality assurance systems in place. These included resident feedback, cleaning, care, health and safety and staff monitoring. All records seen during the visit were organised, detailed and up to date. The homes area manager visits the home on a regular basis to support the staff and to carry out monitoring of the service to ensure that the home is working within the law and the companies’ policies and procedures. Reports of these visits are sent to the Commission For Social Care Inspection and detail the areas covered, which include the environment, the quality of care and discussions with staff and residents. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 A handyman was employed at the home and a routine programme of maintenance was in place. Areas throughout the home were very well maintained and detailed records of fire; water and safety checks were kept. Information provided prior to the visit and records seen demonstrated that all major systems and equipment had been routinely serviced to promote a safe environment. The staff had received regular training to promote the health, safety and welfare of the residents and their colleagues. Regular Health and Safety meetings were held by the housekeeper to discuss areas such as risk assessment, safe use of cleaning substances and safe working practices. Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 4 3 X 4 3 5 X INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 4 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 4 35 4 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 4 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 4 14 X 15 4 16 3 17 4 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 4 X 3 X 4 X X 4 X Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Sheffield Area Office Ground Floor, Unit 3 Waterside Court Bold Street Sheffield S9 2LR 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 Neville Court DS0000064280.V315225.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!