Inspection on 09/08/06 for Paddock House

This inspection was carried out on 9th August 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 found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Paddock House 01/08/07

Paddock House 22/12/05

Paddock House 07/09/05

Paddock House 09/02/05

Paddock House 11/08/04

Similar services:

Claremont House

Oak Ridge

Sun Court Nursing Home

Ashville House

Bilney Hall

Hill Barn

Mabbs Hall Nursing Home

Henrietta House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Paddock House Wellington Road Eye Suffolk IP23 7BE Lead Inspector Jane Higham Unannounced Inspection 9th August 2006 10:15 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 Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Paddock House Address Wellington Road Eye Suffolk IP23 7BE 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) 01379 870440 01379 873332 Suffolk County Council Mrs Elaine Margaret Hyde Care Home 30 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (10), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (20) of places Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 22nd December 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Paddock House is situated in the market town of Eye and owned and administered by Suffolk County Council. It is close to all the local shops and other facilities in the town. The service offers accommodation and care for up to thirty older people with ten of those places being offered for residents with special needs. All the bedrooms are for single occupancy and have the benefit of ensuite facilities. The accommodation is on two floors, with a passenger lift for access, and divided into three units. Each unit has its own kitchen/dining area and separate lounge. There are also assisted bathrooms and toilets in the communal areas of the building. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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 Key Inspection of Paddock House, a thirty bedded care home for older people, owned and administered by Suffolk County Council and sited in the centre of the town of Eye. The inspection was carried out on 09 August 2006, over a period of six and a half hours. The key inspection focused on the care standards relating to Care Homes for Older People. The report has been written using accumulated evidence gathered prior to and during the inspection. Prior to the inspection, the home was provided with both service user and relative/visitor questionnaires for distribution. The Commission received twenty questionnaires from relatives/visitors and twelve from service users. Information contained in these questionnaires has been included in this report. The National Minimum Standards and Care Homes Regulations 2001 are referred to throughout this report and any non-compliance identified. All key standards were assessed as part of this inspection. The Registered Manager of the home was present throughout the inspection and assisted with the inspection process. The Inspector had the opportunity to talk to both residents and staff members during the inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Since the previous inspection, the standard of individual resident care plans has improved markedly. Care plans provide clear guidance to staff on the level of support and intervention required. The introduction of an Emotional Profile for each resident has assisted in ensuring that the emotional needs are met as well as those of a physical nature. Since the previous inspection the home has been able to evidence that staff are provided with a structured supervision system. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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 Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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, 2, 3, 5 and 6 Prospective residents and/or their representative can expect to be provided with sufficient information on which to base a decision on whether they would wish to live at the home. Prospective residents can also expect to receive a full assessment of their needs have the opportunity to try out the service before making the placement permanent when they will be issued with a contract. The home does not offer an intermediate care service. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has a very well presented and detailed Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide. Both documents were seen on the day of the inspection. A copy of the Service User Guide is available in the room of each resident. This document had just been updated to include a new staffing structure. The document was very user friendly and included a list of the telephone numbers of local shops and businesses. The Service User Guide includes a copy of the Suffolk County Council complaints procedure entitled “Having your Say”. The Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 home has a very comprehensive Statement of Purpose which sets out clearly the services the home intends to provide. The document includes all information required by regulation. It also includes a specimen contract and a copy of the most recently produced inspection report. Of the twelve resident questionnaires returned to the Commission, eleven residents reported that they had received sufficient information before making a choice to move into the home. One respondent commented that they had moved into permanent care after being a day-care attendee and another stated that they had had the opportunity to look around with their family members before moving in. For the purposes of the inspection, the three most recently admitted residents were selected for the purposes of care tracking. All placements at Paddock House are accessed via the local authority and therefore in all three cases a pre-admission assessment (community care assessment) had been carried out by the named assessor (usually a social worker). The pre-admission assessments contained sufficient information on which a basic initial care plan could be produced. In addition all three residents had been issued with a placement contract which included details of the terms and conditions. The current fee rate at the time of the inspection was stated as £359.00. In all three cases residents were enabled to undertake a trial period of six weeks after which the placement was formally reviewed by homes staff, the resident, family members and the named assessor. Minutes of the review meetings were available for inspection. Although the home does offer periods of respite care, it does not offer an intermediate (rehabilitative) care service. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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, 9 and 10 Residents living at the home can expect to be provided with a plan of care which sets out their individual needs and for their physical and emotional health needs to be met. Practices in relation to the administration and safe keeping of prescribed medication protect residents, although do not offer maximum resident choice. Service Users can expect their right to privacy to be upheld. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: For the purposes of the inspection, the care plans for the three most recently admitted residents were examined. These were found to be comprehensive and detailed the assessed needs of each resident and the interventions and level of support required by care staff to ensure that these needs were met. Since the previous inspection, an “Emotional Profile” had been produced for each resident which included information on emotional triggers, agreed responses to those triggers and agreed strategies for managing the situation. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 These profiles were particularly useful for those staff providing care to residents accommodated within the special needs unit. In order for care staff to respond effectively to the personal care needs of individual residents, a breakdown of each persons needs is placed inside the wardrobe door in each bedroom. The home was able to evidence through documentation that care plans were reviewed on a monthly basis and amendments made where required. The care planning process for each resident also included a risk assessment and a moving and handling assessment. The home was able to evidence that the general physical and mental health needs of residents are monitored and service users are enabled to access community health services where required. Each care plan seen by the inspector included a list of all visits by the local GP surgery and District Nursing notes, which included information on the reason for the visit and any action and advice given to staff in relation to medical interventions. Out of the twelve resident questionnaires returned eleven respondents indicated that they felt they received the care and support they needed. One respondent enthused about the home in their comments saying they never wanted to live anywhere else. As part of the inspection, the systems used for the administration and safe keeping of resident medication were examined. Since the previous inspection and concerns raised at that time, the home has purchased a fit for purpose medication trolley. The Inspector observed the Team Leader on shift administer prescribed medication to residents on one unit. This was completed in a safe and secure manner and medication administration records were completed correctly. It was noted that loose sachets of Movicol were stored in the medication trolley and were not contained in the original packing, so that staff could refer to the prescription label. The care plans seen by the Inspector contained a risk assessment on the ability of individual residents to self administer their prescribed medication. On most of these assessments the phrase “unable to self medicate” was the only entry made and was not supported by any evidence that an assessment had been carried out. Observations throughout the inspection evidenced that staff members respected the privacy of residents and knocked on their bedrooms doors before entering. All bedroom doors were fitted with appropriate privacy locks. Care Plans included information on preferences, individual needs and choices. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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): Residents living at the home cannot necessarily expect to be provided with a planned programme of activities, as this area of service is dependant on time available to care staff. However residents can expect that staff will support them in maintaining contact with family and friends. Residents will be provided with a menu of meals which are both varied and nutritious. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home was able to evidence that it had a planned programme of activities which are offered to residents. This plan was displayed at various sites around the building. This activities plan included flower arranging, video shows, chairobics and carpet bowls. However a log of activities actually undertaken was seen by the Inspector and showed that the level of activity provided was at a minimum level due in part to the fact that this element of service provision was in the main left to the devices of care staff. The level of staffing provided offers limited flexibility for care staff to be able to provide activity to residents and is dependent on time available to them. One resident reported to the Inspector that they would like to get out more but due to the limited staffing available this very rarely occurred. Comments contained in submitted Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 questionnaires in relation to the level of activity provided were divided, 50 advised that the home provided sufficient activity whilst the remaining 50 indicated that they were usually or sometimes offered activity. In order to ensure that this section of service provision is offered, best practice would suggest that the owning organisation employ an activities co-ordinator or increase the level of care staff, in order that they have sufficient time available to take on this role. One comment card submitted by a family member indicated that there were not sufficient staff for residents to be accompanied out for a walk. Several residents seen in different areas around the home were occupying themselves with listening to music, reading, knitting and watching television. The home has an open visiting policy and residents are encouraged and enabled to maintain contact with friends and family. Nineteen of the twenty comment cards returned by relatives and visitors indicated that they were always made welcome by staff when visiting. The Inspector visited one of the living units whilst residents were having lunch. Residents sat in small groups and helped themselves to vegetables which were provided on each table in dishes. On the day of the inspection, residents could chose from a main option of sausage, mash, green beans and carrots or a list of standard alternatives which were set out on table menus. A menu was also displayed on a chalkboard in the dining room. Residents confirmed that they had chosen their meal option that morning. The mid-day meal was served from a hot trolley which had come directly from the kitchen. Four residents were having their lunch in the kitchen/dining room and the remainder had chosen to eat their meal in the privacy of their bedroom. The four residents spoken to confirmed that the meals at the home were of a good standard. One resident confirmed that this was the most important aspect of life at the home. Kitchen premises were found to be of a good standard of cleanliness and were in the process of being deep–cleaned. Storage facilities were appropriate and there was a good provision of fresh vegetables and fruit. The Chef had worked at the home for fifteen years and had a clear commitment to providing meals of a good quality and had a sound knowledge of the preferences of individual residents. It was positive to note that squashes and water were available in all communal areas. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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 Residents living at the home can expect to be provided with sufficient information to enable them to make a complaint or raise any concern they may have. Residents can also expect to be protected from abuse by the home’s reporting procedures. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has a clear complaints procedure in the form of the Suffolk County Council procedure entitled “Having your Say” which is contained as part of the Service User Guide and is also displayed within the home. The home was also able to evidence that it maintains a log of all complaints which provides an audit trail of the investigation carried out and outcomes reached. Since the previous inspection, the Commission has received no complaints in relation to this service. Eight of the twelve resident questionnaires returned to the Commission indicated that residents knew who to speak to at the home if they were not happy or had a concern or complaint. Thirteen of the twenty comment cards submitted by relatives/visitors indicated that respondents were aware of the home’s complaints procedure. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The home was able to evidence that it adheres to the Suffolk County Council protection of vulnerable adults procedure and that staff receive appropriate training in the recognition and reporting of suspected abuse. Staff personnel files seen at the time of the inspection, confirmed that all newly employed staff were subject to a POVA check and Enhanced Disclosure via the Criminal Records Bureau. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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): 19-26 Residents can expect to be provided with accommodation which is of a good standard, clean, comfortable, homely and fit for purpose. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Paddock House comprises of a purpose built building which offers accommodation on two floors; level access is achieved via a passenger lift. Accommodation is divided into three units, each having its own lounge, dining and kitchen facilities in addition to ten single bedrooms. All bedrooms have the benefit of ensuite facilities, incorporating a toilet and wash handbasin. The building has a large reception area with a day centre and residents library leading off. On the day of the inspection, the inspector carried out an environmental tour of Units 1 and 2. Unit 1, which accommodates people with special needs, had particularly spacious communal accommodation. This Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 included a large lounge, dining room and well-equipped kitchen. The lounge had large floor to ceiling windows which flooded the room with natural light. A smaller lounge, which was situated at the end of the corridor, provided a quieter area for residents to spend time. A selection of bedrooms viewed at the time of the inspection, were all furnished comfortably and maintained to a good standard of decorative order and repair. Many of the rooms had been made to look very homely with small items of furniture brought from previous accommodation, photographs, ornaments and paintings. Many of the rooms were equipped with televisions and music centres. In addition to the ensuite facilities provided, the special needs unit had two assisted bathrooms, one of which also had a shower cubicle, which was fitted with a seat. All bathrooms were carpeted which provided a warm, comfortable and safe environment. Appropriate aids and adaptations were sited around the building. Accommodation on the upper floor was again furnished comfortably and decorated attractively. Co-ordinating soft furnishings added to the attractiveness of communal lounge and dining facilities. The Inspector commented on the attractiveness of a large mural on the wall of a kitchen/diner and was advised that this had been completed by residents with the assistance of staff members. All areas of the home were found to be maintained to a good standard of hygiene and cleanliness and no unpleasant odours were detected. In summary, accommodation provided is of a very good standard and provides a homely and comfortable environment for service users. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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 Residents can not necessarily be assured that the level of staffing provided will be appropriate to meet their individual assessed needs. However, residents can expect to be supported by staff who have attained required competency levels and received appropriate training. Residents can expect to be protected by the home’s staff recruitment procedures. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: On the day of the inspection, the special needs unit was staffed by two members of care staff throughout the waking day. Each unit on the upper floor were staffed by one member of care staff with an additional member adopting a floating role between the two units. Despite a requirement being made in the previous inspection report to ensure that an adequate level of staffing is provided to meet the needs of the resident group, the home is currently operating with the same level. Care staff are not only responsible for providing direct care to residents but also to offer a meaningful programme of activities. The current level of staffing and dependency levels of residents does not allow any leeway for this area of service provision. As the dependency level of residents has increased, several residents require the assistance of two members of care staff at any one time. This leaves other residents with little or no assistance at that time. Two residents spoken to at the time of the Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 inspection, commented that the minimal staffing levels currently provided prohibits them from going out for walks, escorted by a member of care staff. The home employs a total of 38 care staff, 65 of which have obtained NVQ Level 2 or 3 qualifications. There are also four members of staff who have obtained an NVQ Level 4 qualification. The home maintains an overall training record for all staff members. This record was available for inspection and evidenced that all staff members are provided with all areas of mandatory training ie moving and handling and fire safety. It was identified however, that some staff members who were involved in food preparation on the living units, required “refresher training” in basic food hygiene. The home was also able to evidence that staff working on the special needs unit undertake three day training on the care of older people with dementia. The personnel file of the two most recently employed staff members evidenced that they had been provided with a structured induction training package. The personnel files of the two most recently employed staff members evidenced that the recruitment procedures of the service were appropriate and that two written references and a POVA check were secured before any prospective staff member commenced duties. Feedback gained from both resident questionnaires and discussions with service users at the time of the inspection was very positive. Eleven of the twelve questionnaires returned by service users indicated that they felt that staff always listened to what residents had to say and acted upon it. Seventeen of the twenty comment cards returned by relative/visitors indicated that they were kept informed of important matters concerning there family member. One service user, who was not feeling very well on the day of the inspection, commented on how lovely the staff were and how they felt truly spoilt by the wonderful care provided. Eight of the twelve resident comment cards submitted indicated that in general residents did not feel that there was always a sufficient level of staff available. 50 of relative/visitor comment cards submitted also made the same observation. One respondent commented that “although Paddock House is a friendly and caring place, at times it seems understaffed”. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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, 36 and 38 Residents can expect the home to be competently managed and administered and that their views on the standard of the service provided are actively sought. Additionally, residents can expect their finances to be safeguarded by the home’s accounting procedures and that their health and safety is protected. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home comes under the control of Suffolk County Council and is managed by Mrs. Elaine Hyde who has a wealth of experience in the provision of care to older people. Mrs. Hyde holds a Diploma in the Management of Care. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 In addition to the monthly quality assurance visit carried out in compliance with Regulation 26 of the Care Homes Regulations 2001, the home was able to evidence that resident satisfaction questionnaires are distributed on an annual basis. The most recent questionnaire had been distributed during the week prior to the inspection as had a staff questionnaire. The Manager was in the process of collating responses received. The home was able to evidence that unit meetings are held on a regular basis and provide a forum for service users to raise any concerns or suggestions they may have. The Inspector discussed with the administrator the procedures used for the distribution of residents personal allowance. A spreadsheet gave details of which residents preferred their personal allowance to be paid directly into their savings account and which would prefer to have theirs paid out. The home was able evidence that where residents received their personal allowance they were requested to sign for its receipt. Incidental expenses could be paid for via the home’s petty cash system and then invoiced directly to the County Treasurers Department. Staff personnel records seen at the time of the inspection, evidenced that a formal supervision process was in place for all staff members, records of which were maintained. The home was able to provide a current electrical safety certificate and a certificate in relation to the testing of all portable electrical appliances. The home’s Gas Safety certificate had expired and the Manager was able to evidence that she had been pursuing this with the estates department of Suffolk County Council. Records in relation to Fire Safety were maintained, although it was identified that no fire alarm tests were logged for two weeks at the end of July 2006, however, the print out from the fire alarm system confirmed that one of these tests did take place but was not recorded in the appropriate log. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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 4 3 3 x 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 2 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 x 4 x 3 3 x 2 Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 OP9 Regulation 13(2) Requirement The Registered Persons must ensure that prescribed medication is retained in its original packaging together with the prescription label. The Registered Persons must ensure that where appropriate residents are enabled to retain control and self-administer their medication. Where this is not appropriate a risk assessment must provide evidence as to why a person cannot maintain control over their prescribed medication. Existing risk assessments must be reviewed. The Registered Persons must ensure that residents are offered a programme of meaningful activities. This is a repeat requirement from the last two inspections. 4. OP27 18 (1) (a) The Registered Persons must ensure that there are adequate numbers of staff on duty to meet the needs of residents. 09/08/06 Timescale for action 09/08/06 2 OP9 OP14 12(2) 09/08/06 3. OP12 16 (2) (n) 25/09/06 Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 This is a repeat requirement from the previous inspection. 5 OP38 13(4) The Registered Persons must ensure that the home has a valid Gas Safety Certificate and that it is available for inspection. 26(4)(c)(v The Registered Persons must ) ensure that fire alarm systems are tested on a weekly basis in compliance with the Fire Service Guidance. 09/08/06 6 OP38 09/09/06 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1 Refer to Standard OP15 Good Practice Recommendations The Registered Persons should ensure that staff involved in the preparation of food for residents are provided with basic food hygiene refresher training on a three yearly basis. Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Suffolk Area Office St Vincent House Cutler Street Ipswich Suffolk IP1 1UQ 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 Paddock House DS0000037493.V299725.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!