Inspection on 10/07/06 for Orchard Court

This inspection was carried out on 10th July 2006.

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 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

Orchard Court 23/10/07

Orchard Court 06/12/05

Orchard Court 19/07/05

Orchard Court 02/09/04

Orchard Court 19/05/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

Old Hastings House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Orchard Court Orchard Court East Grinstead Road Lingfield Surrey RH7 6ET Lead Inspector Megan McHugh Key Unannounced Inspection 10th July 2006 09:45 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 Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.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. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Orchard Court Address Orchard Court East Grinstead Road Lingfield Surrey RH7 6ET 01342 834444 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) sharon.blackwell@anchor.org Anchor Trust Miss Michelle Justine Corri Nathan Care Home 63 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (20), Mental registration, with number Disorder, excluding learning disability or of places dementia - over 65 years of age (10), Old age, not falling within any other category (28), Physical disability over 65 years of age (15) Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 6th December 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Orchard Court is an Anchor Trust Care Home. It is situated in the village of Lingfield and is close to the local shops and community amenities. The Home is purpose built to accommodate and care for up to 63 older people some of whom may have a past or present mental health need and/or a physical disability. The Homes bedroom and community living areas are arranged into seven group living residential units. They are on two floors accessible by passenger lift. There is a Day Centre located at Orchard Court available to residents. The grounds comprise of lawns and a new patio area. Weekly rates are £446.58 to £578.79. Some extras are not included in the fees and this information is provided in the statement of purpose. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection undertaken by Meg McHugh, Regulation Inspector for the service. The inspection was undertaken over a period of six and a half hours and was the first inspection in the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) year 2006 to 2007. The registered manager was present during the inspection process. Two relatives, three service users and three members of staff had in depth discussions and ten service users and a number of staff members had short conversations (in passing) with the inspector. Records were sampled and a tour of the premises was undertaken during the inspection process. A preinspection report had been completed by the home providing information on for example staffing levels, complaints, policies and procedures and copies of menus. Ten comment cards were received from residents and nine from relatives and these comments are reflected in this report. The Commission would like to thank the staff and service users for their hospitality and cooperation throughout the inspection process. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The manager has reviewed and forwarded a copy of the statement of purpose to the Commission and this was also found on the table with the visitors signing in book. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Risk assessments have been reviewed, updated and were found in service users files and in the office for those risk assessments that are in relation to the premises. All files now contain a photograph of each service user too. Specified carpets were replaced and the home has an ongoing plan in place for redecoration and further replacement of carpets in the home. A copy of this was provided for the inspector and will be kept under review. Staff have training plans in place and the manager discussed proposed training in the care of service users with dementia that will take place soon in the home. Staff are receiving supervision and the schedule shows that all staff will receive a minimum of six sessions in a year. 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. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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 Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 and 6 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users have their needs assessed prior to admission in to the home to ensure that the home is able to meet their needs. The home does not provide intermediate care. EVIDENCE: Files sampled contained pre-admission assessments by the local county council and a short additional assessment from the home. The manager stated that they do not complete a detailed assessment as the county councils assessment is very detailed. A copy of the homes full assessment was seen and was satisfactory. One file sampled was for a respite client and this also contained the required information. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The care planning process and records were satisfactory but need to be kept under monthly review to ensure service users needs are being met. Medication administration records were satisfactory and training was comprehensive. Medication administration records should be kept securely. Service users rights and privacy was respected. EVIDENCE: Six care plans were looked at in detail and a number of other care plans were viewed during the process. The home uses an Individual Lifestyle agreement or ILA system for their care plans and this was seen to be holistic in nature and included physical, mental, emotional, social and personal care needs. This was very positive. Many service users had a short quick glance style plan in the front of their file as well so that staff could see the basic care needs quickly. Not all the units care plans sampled were reviewed on a monthly basis although the paperwork for the review clearly states monthly review. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 The home has risk assessments in place for mobility, falls, nutrition and individual assessments for individual service users depending on what risk had been identified for the person. These were reviewed on a regular basis and the mobility assessments were reviewed monthly. This was seen as good practice. The manager stated that Anchor is introducing a new ILA system in September and all the Anchor homes will then have the same system in place, which will make it easier to monitor and to train staff. It was noted that some of the ILA paperwork in Orchard Court was seen as good practice as included paperwork on Continence programmes to improve and help service users maintain continence, there was a catering page where service users could put down their likes and dislikes and staff could see at a glance what the person would and would not like to eat. They had introduced a family and friends page too which had the service user’s name in the middle and then everyone that was important to them around their name. The home uses personal care charts to tick off baths, strip washes, bed changes, hair washing etc, however it was variable in the units as to whether this was done or not. It appeared that some service users had not had a bath since the beginning of June 06. This was discussed with the manager and on further investigation it was noted that the bathing information was noted in the service user’s daily notes. This too will be changed with the new ILA format. It was pleasing to note that many Lifestyle agreements were signed by the service users and during the course of the day service users informed the inspector of their care plans and that they helped develop these when they were admitted. Service users health care needs are met. All service users were registered with a GP surgery and some informed the inspector that they still attend their old GP surgery that they attended prior to moving into Orchard Court. This was pleasing to hear. The home is supported by the district nurses and there was evidence in service users files of visits from the optician, dentist, audiologist, dietician and physiotherapist. On the day of the site visit, the manager was having a meeting with the district nurses to discuss how the home can improve communication with the nurses to ensure that the service users get prompt and correct treatment. A medication administration round was not observed during the course of the inspection. The medication policies were seen and include a clear policy about actions to take in the event of medication administration errors, these were satisfactory. The manager discussed the home’s monitoring system that is Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 used and this appeared to be working as no errors where seen on the day of the site visit. It was recommended that the medication charts are locked away as they contain information about the service users. This was actioned at the inspection. The care practice observed during the inspection process showed that service users privacy is respected. The staff were overheard talking respectfully with service users and many service users stated that the staff are kind and respect their wishes. Staff were observed knocking on doors and it was noted in the Lifestyle agreements what name the service user prefers to called. Ten out of ten service user comment cards stated that their privacy was respected. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Activities provided were satisfactory and offered a good range of activities to suit as many service users as possible. Visitors are welcome in the home at anytime and the meals provided met service users needs. Service users exercise choice and control over their lives. EVIDENCE: The activities lady was on duty on the day of the inspection and she explained the training package she was implementing for staff to ensure that they are able to provide activities for service users on their units and when the activities people are not on duty. Activity boxes are provided on each unit and these contained games and ideas for staff to be able to provide activities on their units. On one unit it was noted that there was a list of suggested activities put forward by the service users. A copy of the programme of activities was provided and this showed a varied range of activities were provided to suit a wide range of service users likes and needs. The home has a large day room on the ground floor where many of the activities take place. There is a day centre held in the activities room three Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 days of the week and this is attended by approximately 15 older people from within the community and service users of Orchard Court are encouraged to join in with the activities provided. Service users spoken with stated that activities are provided and that many are very good. A service user stated that they sometimes take part but not always out of choice, Another service user stated that they prefer not to take part in any planned activities but rather prefer to stay in their bedroom. Ten out of ten replies to the service user survey stated that suitable activities are provided. Many service users talked to the inspector about their visitors and stated that they can visit at any time. Some visitors were seen in the home and a few were spoken with. Service users talked about going out with family and for walks in the gardens. It was noted that religious needs were noted in the individual Lifestyle agreements and there was mention of a church service being held in the home. Service users discussed choice and how they still have control over their lives even though they require assistance with some activities. Copies of the menus were provided and these showed that meals are varied and offer a choice of meals. Comments received from service users in relation to meals was positive. One stated that the meals were good and they give you what you want to eat. A comment from the service users comment cards was that the food was superb. Ten out of ten comment cards received back stated that they liked the food. Comments received on the day of the inspection included that the food was good, we get a choice of meals and that generally service users were aware of their right to ask for another meal other than what was provided on the menu for the day. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.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 inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users are confident that their concerns are listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. The service users are safeguarded against abuse. EVIDENCE: The homes complaints log was sampled and contained information about complaints made directly to the home and action that was taken by the home. It was noted that there have been a large number of complaints made to the home since December 2005. The manager stated that the number of complaints seems to be reducing now. She stated that she welcomed any complaints and used them as an opportunity to improve the service provided. She stated that since she started at the home she moved her office to the front office so that relatives and service users can see her when they are on the ground floor and this has encouraged people to approach her with any problems and this has made the manager more approachable and open to all. The manager talked about the homes complaints procedure and evidence showed that this was followed. A service user stated that they knew who they would complain to should they need to do so. Three of the nine comment cards received back from relatives stated that they were unaware of the complaints procedure and six were aware. Two relatives spoken to on the day stated they were aware of whom to complain to should they need to do so and one stated Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 that there was a copy of the complaints procedure in the lift. The complaints procedure was also seen above the visitors signing in book. Records sampled indicated that staff have had training in safeguarding vulnerable adults in their rights and responsibilities training in their induction. Other staff training records indicated that some staff have had further training in this area, including the manager. Staff stated that they were aware that they must report any incidents they feel are abuse and discussed the types of abuse that can occur. The home has a local procedure and has a copy of the local multi-agencys procedures. During a recent incident the home followed the correct steps in reporting this. All ten of the service user comment cards received back stated that they felt safe in the home. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19 and 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was generally well maintained and kept in a good condition. However there were areas that were in need of attention and these were being addressed. The home was clean and hygienic. EVIDENCE: All areas of the home were generally in a good condition. A copy of the budget and the survey was provided to evidence the planned work in the home for redecoration and replacement of carpets and furniture. The manager discussed the plans for changing two units into specialise dementia units and was in the process of sourcing furniture and paint colours for these units that would assist service users find their bedrooms, bathrooms and that would benefit service users with Dementia in all aspects of their lives. This was being done in consultation with Anchors dementia training team and outside agencies who provide information and assistance in providing care for people with dementia. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The and and and home comprises of 7 units over two floors, each unit with its own lounge dining room. There is a large day room on the ground floor for activities a small seating area on the ground and first floor. The garden is secure accessible. The home was clean and good infection control care practice was observed. COSHH cupboards were locked on each unit and no COSHH items were seen to be unattended in the home. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29 and 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is staffed in order to meet service users needs. Staff training is satisfactory. However staff must receive training in caring for people with dementia as soon as possible. Recruitment was sound and protected service users. EVIDENCE: The staffing levels were satisfactory on the day of the inspection. The manager stated that there are 9 care staff on duty with a senior care officer during morning shift, 8 care staff and a senior care officer for the afternoon shift. At night there are 3 care staff and a senior care officer on duty. The manager stated that the plan is to have two staff on the dementia care units and one staff member per unit for the other five units. Comments received back from service users in the comment cards were: 9 out of 10 stated they were well cared for, 10 out of 10 stated that staff treated them well. Other comments included that the carers are kind, everybody is friendly, staff are excellent and are willing to go the extra mile. Service users on the day stated that staff were nice, kind and that they couldn’t ask for more. One service user stated that sometimes they do appear to be short staffed. Six of the nine relatives comment cards returned stated that the home was sufficiently staffed and three stated it was not. Other Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 comments were that staff were kind, patient, caring, friendly and treat service users with respect. A few relatives and service users stated that there did seem to be a communication problem between staff as information did not appear to be getting from one shift to another shift. This was discussed with the manager and left for her to take action. The home has 52 of staff with a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in care. Staff talked about starting their courses and there is a continued programme available for staff to obtain their qualification. Staff discussed training with the inspector and informed her what training they had received, this included the mandatory training in fire safety, moving & handling, health & safety, 1st Aid, food hygiene and protection form abuse. Other training provided included medication training, principles of care and food presentation. The staff require training in caring for service users with dementia and the manager stated that Anchor is rolling out a 5 day training programme on dementia but was not sure when this would be provided at Orchard Court. In the interim she is sourcing alternative training for the staff and will confirm the dates of this training as soon as possible. The manager stated that she has a good budget for training and intends to use this in the most appropriate way. Staff stated that they receive regular training and that they can request training relevant to their jobs. Six staff files were case tracked and these all contained the required information of proof of identity, Criminal Record Bureau checks and two references. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 and 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The management team was sound and the views of service users was actively sought. No issues were raised about the health, welfare and safety of service users. EVIDENCE: The manager has been in post since October 2005 and has recently become registered with the Commission. Staff and service users stated that they found the manager approachable and that she had made positive changes to the home since taking over as the manager. The manager stated that the home welcomes feedback from all the visitors and the service users. There are consistent efforts from both the management and Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 the care staff to encourage residents to take part in the running of the home. The monthly residents meeting is due to be held on the 12th July and posters were seen in all units advertising this. The minutes of the previous meeting were available in the units. The service users and their families are consulted when changes are planned. There are opportunities offered for one to one discussions with the manager. The management style is proactive. The manager stated that questionnaires were not provided individually but that Anchor’s compliments, comments and complaints form was available next to the visitors signing in book. All respite service users have been sent questionnaires following their stay in the Home. The manager stated that the catering department is about to start a comment book and that the chef is going to make a regular visit to the units to talk to service users about the menus and meals provided. Other forms of quality assurance included 3 monthly relatives meetings with the next one due to be held on the 13th July 2006. The home completes their in-house auditing system called SAM (Self Assessment Manual) and has monthly unannounced Regulation 26 visits from another manager to ensure the smooth running of the home and to pick up any issues or problems. The financial records were not inspected, however the home is using the SMART system for documentation and recording, as required by Anchor, for all financial transactions. The manager then audits the records on a regular basis to ensure they are accurate. There are a number of good health and safety policies and procedures in the home. The staff received training in all aspects of health and safety with regular yearly updates. The pre-inspection questionnaire had been completed by the home that stated that all the necessary health and safety checks had been carried out within expected timescales. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 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 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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. 1. 2. Standard OP7 OP30 Regulation 15(2)(b) 18(1)(c) (i) Requirement Care plans must have a documented reviewed on a monthly basis. Staff must receive training in caring for service users with dementia. The registered manager must notify the Commission, in writing, the dates that this training will take place. Timescale for action 31/07/06 21/07/06 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 OP7 OP7 Good Practice Recommendations Care plans should be rewritten on an annual basis, especially if there have been many changes to the individual’s care needs. The personal care charts should be filled in if they are in the service user’s file. If these are left blank then it could be seen as the care has not been provided. Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection Surrey Area Office The Wharf Abbey Mill Business Park Eashing Surrey GU7 2QN 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 Orchard Court DS0000013740.V302393.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 - 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!