Inspection on 02/07/08 for Neville House

This inspection was carried out on 2nd July 2008.

CSCI found this care home to be providing an Good service.

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 House 30/07/07

Neville House 17/05/06

Neville House 07/12/05

Neville House 18/08/05

Neville House 09/03/05

Neville House 10/05/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 28/09/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Neville House Neville Street Chadderton Oldham OL9 6LD Lead Inspector Sandra Buckley Unannounced Inspection 2nd July 2008 09:30 X10015.doc Version 1.40 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 House DS0000005512.V367261.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 Older People. 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 House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Neville House Address Neville Street Chadderton Oldham OL9 6LD 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) 0161 627 5874 nevillehouse@btconnect.com Dr Bhima Odedra Rachael Maponga-Mulvey Care Home 17 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (5), Learning registration, with number disability over 65 years of age (1), Old age, not of places falling within any other category (9), Sensory Impairment over 65 years of age (2) Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Service users to include up to 9 OP up to 5 DE (E), up to 1 LD (E) and up to 2 SI (E). 30th July 2007 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Neville House is a privately owned residential care home for older people. Local amenities such as shops, pubs and a GP practice are close by and bus services run to Oldham centre and surrounding areas. The front of the home faces to a side road. The rear of the premises has a small car park and garden area. The property has been extended to provide accommodation in seven single and five shared rooms. Accommodation is available on the ground and first floors and a passenger lift is available. On the ground floor there is a large lounge and a dining room. Fees in the home range from £350 to £360. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 2 stars. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes This was a key inspection that included a site visit to the home. The manager was not told beforehand that we were coming to inspect, this is called an unannounced inspection. This inspection looked at all the key standards and included a review of all available information received by the Commission for Social Care (CSCI) about the service provided at the home since the last inspection. During the site visit information was taken from various sources, including observing care practices and talking to people in the home. The manager, relatives and some members of the staff team were also interviewed. A tour of the home was undertaken and a sample of care, employment and health and safety records were seen. Comments from questionnaires returned from residents and their relatives are also included in this report The CSCI requires the home to complete an annual quality assurance assessment (AQAA) in order to demonstrate the level of care provided. Comparisons were made with this document at the time of inspection. On this inspection the outcomes for people in the home did reflect that indicated by the manager in the AQAA, especially in relation to daily life, personal care and protection. The manager had recognised what improvements could be made and was taking steps to address the issues. The Commission for Social Care Inspection had not received any complaints about the how the home operates. The manager had received one, which they had investigated to the complainant’s satisfaction. There have been no adult protection issues. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The manager demonstrated in the Annual Quality Assurance Assessment and, at interview, how improvements could be made in care practices and décor in the home. Therefore no requirements were made on this inspection. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standard 3 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. A detailed assessment of need obtained from professionals ensures the manager has sufficient information to ensure people’s needs can be met. EVIDENCE: Two case files were looked at in depth. These were found to have an assessment of need obtained from professionals prior to people’s admission to the home. Each person had a copy of service user guide and statement of purpose in their bedrooms for reference. One person said, ‘I looked around several homes and decided that Neville House was best.’ Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 7, 8, 9, 10. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. People’s needs were met through staff training and care planning in line with their assessment of needs. EVIDENCE: Each person’s assessed need had a care plan and risk assessment in place. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated. The manager’s Annual Quality Assurance Assessment stated improvements in the last 12 months have been more detailed care planning. One person’s questionnaires said, ‘The standard of care and support has improved recently since the change of management.’ People were weighed regularly and once a weight loss had been identified, nutritional screening had taken place and a care plan implemented. For example, one person’s care plan stated, ‘Small appetite, serve small portions and offer regular milky drinks.’ Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Care plans reflected people’s preferences in daily routines, for example, one person said, ‘Prefer to get up between 6 and 7 am and go to bed at 9 pm. Also recorded were people’s levels of independence, such as able to wash and dress themselves or needs help with bathing and combing back of hair. Professional visits from GP’s district nurses and chiropody were recorded. Relatives’ questionnaire comments were mixed, saying ‘The doctor has visited mum but I had to ask for the results. Any changes in medication are not always conveyed.’ The manager had recognised the need for improvements as recorded on the Annual Quality Assurance Assessment, saying plans for the future are to continue to promote independence and encourage families to be involved in care planning. Another questionnaire said, “Every carer is good. I cannot recognise her, she has put on weight and enjoys the food. The home keeps us informed of everything”. The last inspection report identified that daily notes required more detail. Improvement had been made on this inspection with more details being recorded in relation to care delivery. One member of staff’s questionnaire said, ‘Up to date information is given through the communication book and handovers on every shift and care plans are updated’. One service user questionnaire said, ‘Staff are usually available to help and answer any questions about care and pay attention to my needs. There have been real improvements in this area in the last 12 months.’ Also, ‘I recently had a stay in hospital, staff at Neville House arranged this and kept in touch with the family.’ Medication administration, storage and recording were implemented to a satisfactory standard. However, packaging received directly from the pharmacist did not provide information on recognition of tablets when mixed together in a weekly dosette box. The manager had also recognised this during a spot check of the above system and had requested a visit from the pharmacist. Accident recording was followed through into care planning and daily notes in order to monitor people’s progress. There was sufficient equipment in the home to promote independence and safe working practices were observed being carried out. People’s care needs were discussed in staff meetings. One meeting had taken place showed that the manager had discussed the end of life care and that people’s fingernails should be checked regularly. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 12, 13, 14, 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. Routines in the home were flexible and people have choices in their daily lives. EVIDENCE: People said routines were flexible which was also identified in care planning. For example, “Prefers to get up at 8am”. Social histories were on file and people’s preferences were recorded, such as dislikes too much noise, prefers two pillows and requests the light to be kept on at night. Where possible, people are encouraged to maintain links previously made in their community. One person continued to attend a local bingo group assisted by ring and ride transport. Questionnaires received from people in the home said “I am happy, which is the main thing”, “I have made friends people can talk to each other” also “We can have a cup of tea in bed if we want”. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 People interviewed on the day of the visit also confirmed this and added “We sit out side in the nice weather” and “There are always a lot of flowers around the home. Regular meetings are held with people in the home; the last meeting being on the 17th June 2008. The comments made at the meeting included the request for more entertainment and that people would like a gazebo for the garden. Some said they would like visits resumed from the local clergy. This was discussed with the manager who said there had recently been a new appointment at the church and it was hoped to resume the visits as soon as possible. The Annual Quality Assurance Assessment stated that improvements planned for the next 12 months included to continue to promote choices and preferences. We dined with people in the home who said, “Food is always good” and “This is a really nice place”. Changes to the menu had also been discussed at the residents’ meeting. A choice of hot food at teatime was offered, however this was not reflected on the menu. The manager said she would act on this immediately and felt that because the home only catered for a small number of people, staff knew their preferences well. Several people choose to have a hot meal at teatime. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 16, 18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. Policies and procedures together with staff training in the protection of vulnerable adults ensure people are protected in the home. EVIDENCE: The complaints procedure is on the notice board of the home. There is also one in each case file and one included in the service user guide, which people have in their rooms. The Commission for Social Care Inspection has not received any complaints about the home and there are no adult protection issues. The manager maintains a record of any complaints received, the last one being on 19th June 2007 from a relative, regarding medication issues. There was evidence that the manager had dealt with this in an appropriate manner through consultations with the family, professionals and GP. One person in the home said, ‘If I weren’t happy I would see the manager.’ Eleven staff are employed in the home, seven have completed protection of vulnerable adults training. Five others are awaiting training through Oldham’s training in partnership, Social Services. Staff at interview demonstrated a good knowledge of how abuse may present and what action should be taken if this occurred. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 19, 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. People living in the home do so in a comfortable, clean and homely environment. EVIDENCE: All communal areas were inspected and found to be clean, tidy and without odour. A selection of bedrooms were inspected, all of which were homely and personalised. Refurbishments included a new lounge carpet and curtains, also a large screen television. A new hydraulic bath chair had also been purchased. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 There are five double rooms and seven single rooms; there are no en-suite facilities. One person had agreed with the manager they could use one of the shared rooms for single occupancy. Several new commode chairs have been purchased to enhance the ambience of the bedrooms and privacy curtains are available in shared rooms. Residents had chosen their own bedding. A fire risk assessment was completed for each room. Comments received from people living in the home were, ‘the home is comfortable and friendly. The general ambience and appearance of the home is much improved and residents seem much happier.’ Relative questionnaires stated: ‘Mum’s room is always fresh and clean but the day room can sometimes have an unpleasant smell.’ Another said, ‘The home is generally friendly, welcoming and clean and has much improved recently.’ The last inspection report identified that there were failed double glazed units. The manger said that quotes had been obtain for replacement windows. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 27, 28, 29, 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. Staffing levels and training provided ensured that the residents living in the home benefited from a well trained staff group provided in sufficient numbers for their needs to be met. EVIDENCE: People in the home were complimentary about the staff team, saying, “They are a very nice staff team who work together” also “Staff treat us very well”. At the time of this visit examination of the staff duty rota showed sufficient staff to meet the needs of people accommodated in the home. Staff at interview demonstrated knowledge of the needs and dependency levels of people in their care. Staff said that training was provided in line with people’s needs. All staff had completed NVQ training. Communication systems in the home included regular handovers, supervision and staff meetings. We looked at staff recruitment procedure and practices and found that all necessary checks had been undertaken to ensure people’s safety. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The Annual Quality Assurance Assessment completed by the manager said that plans for the future included the involvement of people in the home in staff recruitment. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. 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 and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 31, 33, 35, 38. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence, including a visit to this service. The management of the home operates using an open and inclusive atmosphere, ensuring people receive consistent quality care through an open and inclusive atmosphere and recognises areas for improvement. EVIDENCE: The manger has been in post for approximately one year and holds a BA Honours degree in Health and Social Care. They have enrolled for NVQ level 4 in management and continue their professional development through short courses provided by Oldham Training in Partnership, Social Services department. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 One resident questionnaire said, “The change of management at Neville House has had a real positive effect on all aspects of the home and care given and residents are happier”. The manager completed the Annual Quality Assurance Assessment required by the Commission for Social Care Inspection; we discussed with the manager the lack of full details reflecting how the care home operates. However, the information recorded did reflect the positive outcomes for people in the home with the manager recognising what improvements could be made. For example, … maintain health and safety and improve relationships with families. The financial records of two people living in the home were examined and found to balance with monies held on their behalf. Receipts were retained for proof of purchase. Records were maintained of checks to equipment, i.e., hoist, gas, and electrics. There was evidence of good communication systems with staff through regular handovers, supervision and staff meetings. The manager meets with residents on a regular basis to discuss any issues. The last meeting was held on the 17th June 2008. Quality assurance systems were in place with the manager completing an analysis for reference purposes. The home has been awarded the Safer Food Better Business certificate. Improvements have been made to the recording systems in the last 12 months, although the manager recognises that there is still room for development in this area. Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People 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 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 3 X X X HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Manchester Area Office Unit 1, 3rd Floor Tustin Court Port Way Preston PR2 2YQ National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Neville House DS0000005512.V367261.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 - 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!