Inspection on 15/06/06 for Osborne House Residential Home

This inspection was carried out on 15th June 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 found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Osborne House Residential Home 15/10/08

Osborne House Residential Home 23/01/08

Osborne House Residential Home 31/01/06

Osborne House Residential Home 23/06/05

Osborne House Residential Home 14/12/04

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Osborne House Residential Home 16 Bay Road Clevedon North Somerset BS21 7BT Lead Inspector David Francis Key Unannounced Inspection 15th June 2006 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 Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.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. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Osborne House Residential Home Address 16 Bay Road Clevedon North Somerset BS21 7BT 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) 01275 872600 Osborne House (Ladye Bay, Clevedon) Limited Mr Rex Frederick Mackrill Care Home 26 Category(ies) of Dementia (1), Dementia - over 65 years of age registration, with number (26) of places Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. 4. May provide residential personal care for up to 26 persons, aged over 65 years, with Dementia. The two additional bedrooms are not to be used until minimum standards have been achieved and checked by the inspector. May accommodate one named person under 65 with Dementia care needs. Home will revert when named person leaves. May admit one named person aged 59 years and over. This condition lapses when the person leaves or becomes 65. 31st January 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Osborne House is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection to provide a personal care service for up to 26 persons with dementia over the age of 65 years. There are also added conditions of registration imposed as listed above. Mr Rex Mackrill is the registered provider and manager. The home is a pleasant period building with panoramic views over the Bristol Channel. It has three floors and twenty-two bedrooms, two of which are shared. At present the home can take up to 24 persons. There is a call system throughout the home. There is a conservatory, dining room and two good-sized lounges. One room has en-suite facilities. There are ample assisted baths and communal showers and toilet facilities. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspector undertook two visits to the home; the first was unannounced. He spent 12 hours at the home, and for most of the time observed the care being given by staff. He spoke to residents individually and in groups although most residents found it hard to give a verbal opinion about the home. The inspector interviewed 2 care staff and the manager spoke to three other staff. He toured the premises and checked a number of records. The inspector spoke to two relatives away from the home and a Care Manager from Social Services. The inspector “case tracked” three residents comparing his observations with the records and the knowledge of care staff. This outcome of this inspection was good. What the service does well: There is strong leadership from the owner/manager. He wants to provide high quality “person centred care” at Osborne House. This is very important for people with dementia. The home is committed to a long-term programme of improvement. Staff are well trained and are interested in the backgrounds of the residents. They are caring and supportive. They understand the need for activities, which suit individuals. They are patient and encouraging. There is a relaxed atmosphere and a feeling of community. Residents move around home freely talking to each other, staff and visitors. The home has an open culture; the manager is very approachable, and positive action is taken in response to concerns. Relatives are kept informed and feel supported. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.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 Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.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): 1, 3, & 4 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The manager takes a lot of care when admitting residents to Osborne House. In the past the home has occasionally admitted people whose needs it cannot meet but now there is has an improved assessment process in place. There was no evidence of any special arrangements to include or support people with dementia with making a decision to move to the home. EVIDENCE: The inspector checked the paperwork for two recent admissions. This showed that care had been taken when assessing the needs of new residents. The inspector noted that and new residents prefernces had been recorded. The inspector also tried to talk to residents about the decision to move to Osborne house. Only one person could remember anything about it. She said she had not visited the home beforehand and that her family and social services had made the decision. She was happy about the decision and enjoyed being at Osborne House. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 The inspector spoke to a Care Manager who said that the home had been very thorough when she made placements there. She also said the home had been very adpatable, and had successfully looked after people who had particular needs. The home had also taken a married couple and planned carefully to make this a success. The inspector spoke to the manager about an admission that had not been successful. The manager explained that the information provided by the social worker and family had been misleading. The person did not stay at Osborne House for very long. The manager said he was careful not to take people whose needs could not be met and gave examples of placements he had refused. The inspector noted that until recently the home had cared for a perosn who could not speak English. He had been admitted some years ago by the previous owners. The manager said that the home should not have accepted the person. He acknowledged that and in addittion to providing special dishes, the home could have made a more effort to meet his needs to cultural and language needs. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 10 & 11 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. In practical terms, the quality is good. The home responds quickly to residents’ needs and staff know how to care for each resident. However the paperwork is unreliable, as different systems have been used. Not all care plans have been reviewed, as they should be. EVIDENCE: The inspector looked at six files. Some had careplans, others only had the original assessment. There was no evidence of recent reviews. Some of the documents included very detailed risk assessments and included information normally used in nursing homes. It was positive to find personal profiles on all the files with details of each resident’s background history. This is important in the care of people with dementia. The manager explained that the home has tried different systems of recording careplans and the newly appointed deputy was going to streamline the paperwork. The home’s daily event book gave a detailed account of the care being given to residents and it was clear from this Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 record that the staff at the home responded to needs and called for medical support when it was needed. The inspector “case tracked” three residents. He observed their care, spoke to them then checked with two staff whether they understood the person’s needs. In each case staff were aware of the resident’s care needs and how to respond to their behaviour. Staff said they relied on the daily notes and handovers to keep up to date with each resident. The inspector spent much of the inspection closely observing how staff cared for residents. He did this over two shifts. All five care staff were seen to respond quickly to individual’s needs, and were patient and reassuring. Staff were careful to ask residents what was wrong and give them choices about how they might be cared for. They took time to listen to and observe those residents who seemed poorly or distressed. The inspector observed the administration of medicines at lunchtime and in the evening. Staff checked that medication was actually taken by the resident before signing the charts. The daily records of medication were completed clearly and were up to date. The inspector saw ten recent certificates for staff who had completed medication training with the pharmacist. The manager told the inspector that most residents medication had been recently reviewed and the use of medication had dropped. This was confirmed by staff. The inspector asked the manager about one incident when the medication did not arrive on time from the pharmacist. The manager said that the home was in the process of changing to a local pharmacist as the current pharmaicist was some miles away. A care manager told the inspector that the home was careful in organising medication when residents were admitted. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.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 & 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Osborne House provides stimulating activities for a wide range of residents and particular care has been given to making mealtimes an enjoyable experience. There were a number of examples of excellent practice. EVIDENCE: The inspector spent much of the day observing how staff responded to residents. He saw that staff made sure that each resident was spoken to at regular intervals and nobody, including those who were quiet and withdrawn. No one was ignored. Residents were offered choices and invited to take part in both individual and group activities, including collage work and a skittles game. In the afternoon a tea was served in the garden for a group of residents. This was a spontaneous suggestion by staff and was really appreciated. Residents told the inspector that a singer visits the home once a week and that they really enjoyed this. This was confirmed by staff. One member of staff told the inspector she had taken a resident out for a walk and that she hoped to be able to take residents out shopping in the future. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 During the inspection there was a “community” atmosphere, with staff and residents interacting freely (including the manager) . Occasionally some residents called out or sang to themselves and this naturally annoyed others, but it never became a problem. The manager and other staff have undergone training in reminiscence work and are planning to introduce this into the home. Staff told the inspector that the Alzheimer’s training had really helped them understand the importance keeping residents active and engaged. It was positive to note residents freely going out into the garden; the previous manager had deemed this unsafe and as a result life had been restricted. Staff confirmed the new manager was keen to “normalise” life within Osborne house and wanted residents to experience as much freedom as was safe to do. For example plastic beakers had now been replaced by glasses. Many residents were observed to have soft animal toys, which they enjoyed cuddling and caring for and swapped between each other. One relative said that staff were very interested in their relative’s life history and took lots of details, wanting to find activities and conversation, which might stimulate them. The inspection carefully recorded how staff responded to residents. No negative interactions were observed; staff were often encouraging and caring. This is particularly a positive finding in a care home where people have dementia, as responses can easily be negative. These findings are similar to those in the detailed study undertaken at the home. Staff were seen to treat residents with respect and dignity and always offer residents choices rather than presuming they knew what was best. Two relatives told the inspector that they were always made welcome at Osborne House. They both said staff kept them informed and were supportive to them as relatives. The inspector observed both dinner and tea times. The food provided was all home cooked and looked nutritious. The cook told the inspector she was not limited by a budget and purchased fresh vegetables and meat. There were no special diets required at the time of the inspection other than diabetic diets and the cook took care to provide sweet alternatives. The staff took great care to provide choice at the table (with two main meals, two desserts) showing the residents the meals and explaining what they were. This is excellent practice. Staff also took care to cut up food and to sit with those in need of encouragement. They ensured that residents ate as much as they wished by prompting them, and using humour. They gave extra choices to two people who did not want to eat; one lady decided to have her meal in the corridor and Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 have cornflakes and Kit-kat. This was accepted and supported by staff. Two staff sat in the dining room at lunchtime and ate their meals with the residents. A care manager told the inspector that she had placed a lady for a short period who has not been eating well. The home encouraged her eat and as a result she made a good recovery and was able to return home. The inspector talked to the cook at length and was impressed with her interest in the diets of people with dementia and her knowledge of residents likes and dislikes. She was keen to experiment with new ideas. Following the recent care audit the manager explained that the home would shortly be developing three smaller dining areas and that he has ordered a hot food display trolley so that food could be chosen and served at the take. (These changes had been introduced when the inspector visited three weeks later and residents were seen to be eating in small groups and the mealtime appeared to be very relaxed.) Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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 & 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents are protected by an open culture and a manager who will take action if necessary. EVIDENCE: The inspector interviewed two staff who said that they had had training on adult protection and whistle blowing. They knew what they should do if they had concerns about the care of residents. They said the manager was very approachable and they were confident he would take action if it was needed. They were able to give examples of this. Two relatives also told the inspector that they found the manager very approachable and easy to talk too. One said she was going to ring him to talk about some issues she wanted to discuss and knew he would listen to her. In the earlier part of the year the manager had been passed information about poor staff conduct and he took decisive action as a result. Both staff and relatives said the manager spent a lot of time at the home, covering a wide range of shifts. As a result he was in a good position to check residents were cared for properly. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 There were no recent complaints recorded in the home’s complaint book. The manager was able to show the inspector a letter from a relative, making “a request” rather than a complaint and the notes made by the manager indicated that he had responded positively and immediately to the relative. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 & 26 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home provides is generally pleasant. The choice of communal areas and the freedom of movement possible downstairs benefits people with dementia. Further refurbishment and completion of radiator covers is required in order to improve the environment. EVIDENCE: The inspector toured the home, looking at all the communal areas, bedrooms, toilets and bathrooms and gardens. On both visits he found the home to be clean and odour free. The home employs a cleaner/maintenance person. He told the inspector he worked 8 hours a day. Most of the bedrooms appeared to be quite basic and did not have en-suite facilities. He noted that some to the bedroom. furnishings were aging and needed attention or replacement. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The manager said he was investing in the fabric of the home as much as the business finances allowed. There was a lot of evidence of very recent investment in the home including newly acquired garden furniture, beds, serving trolley and sun lounge seating. This was all of substantial build and high quality. The inspector noted that the communal spaces available (two lounges, a sun lounge, dining room. a wide corridor with seating and a patio area) offer residents a variety of options, some quieter, others more lively. He noted how residents moved freely between the spaces, depending how they felt. In one room a television was on, in another classical music. The front sun lounge has excellent views over the Severn Estuary and is relaxing to sit in and observe the sea. The inspector thought the layout worked well. The provider has obtained expert advice and wants to make the home particularly suitable for people with dementia. For example the idea of creating three, separate smaller dining areas so that mealtimes are more rewarding. Previous inspections have raised concern about radiators being hot and the water supply presenting a risk. Orders have been placed for these to be addressed in July. The home offers security without being institutional. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Staff provide good care and are encouraged to train in order to provide appropriate care to people with dementia. EVIDENCE: The inspector spent much of the time observing a wide range of staff supporting and caring for residents. There was no evidence of institutional or poor care. The inspector noted that staff were very patient and “asked “ residents, rather than deciding for them and encouraged residents to be active. The manager has invested very heavily is his own and the staff team’s training and three staff had recently completed the Alzheimer’s training package with high grades. Staff told the inspector how valuable they had found this training and that as a result they tried to understand what might lay behind residents’ behaviour in order to support them, e.g. where a resident is upset by their refection in a mirror. Staff told the inspector that after recent changes in the staff team morale had improved and that staff are now proud to work at Osborne House and want to stay. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 During the inspections there were often three care staff on duty plus the manager and ancillary staff, which is one more than normally rota-d. Whilst staff were busy but this number seemed sufficient and no residents seemed to be overlooked. The manager told the inspector that he had now decided to plan on having three care staff on the morning shifts. Staff told the inspectors that they felt they were well informed and that the daily logs and handovers were invaluable. They said formal supervision was being introduced by the new deputy. The inspector’s positive view of staff was confirmed by two relatives who described staff as welcoming, “capable” and “wanting to do their best to care”. A recent member of staff told the inspector that they had been carefully recruited. The inspector checked three recruitment files and found that there was evidence of a proper process with checks and references being undertaken. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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, 32, 33, 37 & 38 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home is well managed and there is strong leadership. The home strives to provide high quality care. EVIDENCE: There was a lot of praise for the manager from a number of sources; staff, relatives and a care manager. He is regarded as very caring, supportive and approachable. The inspector observed many occasions when residents went up to him and spent time talking with him. He was reassuring and supportive towards residents and was open to their approaches. He has high visibility in the home and gives strong leadership and direction. He encourages openness and discussion and is regarded as someone who listens. He told the inspector Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 he wants Osborne House to provide high quality dementia care has invested in engaging a highly regarded consultancy to undertake a detailed quality audit, which the inspector was able to read. The manager wishes to identify areas for development and has already acted upon some findings e.g. the new dining arrangements. He is very committed to a philosophy of “person centred care” and is actively encouraging this in all aspects of the running of Osborne House. He has a management consultancy background and has undertaken a number of intensive courses in dementia care including Dementia Care Mapping. He has now enrolled on a demanding diploma course in managing dementia care. In order to streamline administration he has engaged a part-time administrator. The inspector spent time talking to her and she explained that she was expected to be part of the life of the home and to train in dementia care so she could be one of the team. The manager believed she should be able to respond appropriately to residents and relatives when necessary. The manager has recently appointed a deputy with a view to delegating some of the responsibility. It was too early to see how well this role will work. The inspector only looked at a sample of records the home, including the fire records. These were well maintained and up to date. As noted previously records of care plans need attention. During discussion with the inspector the manager displayed insight into business planning and the need to have a realistic strategy and the need to plan carefully against projected incomes. Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 3 X 3 3 X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 X 10 3 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 4 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 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 4 4 4 X X X 3 3 Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? YES STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard OP25 Regulation 13(4) Requirement The registered person must commence guarding and/or risk assessing radiators in line with HSE guidelines to minimise any risk to service users, with a view to guarding all radiators by end August 2007. This is a repeated requirement. Up to date service user plans are devised for every resident and reviewed monthly. Timescale for action 31/08/06 2. OP7 15 30/09/06 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Somerset Records Management Unit Ground Floor Riverside Chambers Castle Street Taunton TA1 4AL 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 Osborne House Residential Home DS0000062278.V299519.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - 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!