Inspection on 27/07/06 for Park View

This inspection was carried out on 27th July 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is (sorry - unknown). 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

Park View 23/07/07

Park View 31/01/06

Park View 01/09/05

Park View 03/11/04

Park View 15/01/04

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 Park View Kings Chase Witham Essex CM8 1AX Lead Inspector Diana Green Unannounced Inspection 27th 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 Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Park View Address Kings Chase Witham Essex CM8 1AX 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) 01376 512443 01376 510137 parkview@runwoodhomes.co.uk runwoodhomes.co.uk Runwood Homes Plc Mrs Carol Ann Hunt Care Home 80 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (21), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (80) of places Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Persons of either sex, aged 65 years and over, who require care by reason of old age only (not to exceed 80 persons) Persons of either sex, aged 65 years and over, who require care by reason of dementia (not to exceed 21 persons) Service users under the Mental Health Act 1983 must not be admitted to the home The total number of service users accommodated in the home must not exceed 80 persons One service user aged 87 years with dementia whose name was made known to the Commission in August 2004 to be cared for in the OP unit 31st January 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Park View is a large fully detached purpose built two-story building situated in the centre of Witham and close to all amenities, facilities and public transport links. The home provides accommodation for up to 80 elderly people (over 65), within 4 self-contained units. The accommodation comprises 80 single bedrooms with 79 en-suite facilities. Communal facilities include 4 lounge/dining rooms, 2 lounges, quiet room and a smoking room. There is a large conservatory overlooking the local park. There are 9 bathrooms, all equipped for assisted bathing. Two passenger lifts provide access between floors, one of which can take an ambulance stretcher. Car parking for visitors is provided to the front of the building and there is an enclosed and accessible courtyard garden area. A local park is directly adjacent to the property providing some rooms with pleasant views. The fees range from £403.55-£466.97 weekly. Additional costs apply for chiropody, toiletries, sundries, hairdressing and newspapers. This information was provided to the CSCI on 3/08/06 Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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 that took place on the 27/07/06, lasting 7 hours. The inspection process included: discussions with the registered manager, the cook, eight care staff, seven service users, six relatives, a district nurse, a community psychiatric nurse and feedback from health and social work professionals; a tour of the premises including a sample of residents’ rooms, bathrooms, communal areas, the sluice-rooms and the laundry; and inspection of a sample of policies and records (including any records of notifications or complaints sent to the CSCI since the last inspection). Twenty-six standards were covered, and six requirements made including one repeat requirement and two recommendations. The manager and staff were welcoming and helpful throughout the inspection. Typical comments received from residents and their relatives were: “I can’t fault the care”;“ Carol (the manager) and staff are very approachable”; “a brilliant team”; “care staff are marvellous”; “the activities coordinator is super”; “care staff on the dementia unit are always kind, friendly and caring” “the home is managed well and staff are always approachable”. What the service does well: Although large, the home does have a homely and relaxed atmosphere. Staff are friendly and welcoming. Visiting is open access and relatives and visitors said they were always made to feel welcome and could visit at anytime. A wide range of activities is provided including therapeutic activities for those residents with dementia. Activities coordinators are motivated and strive through fundraising projects to continually develop the service. Although sometimes compromised by staffing levels, the standard of personal care is good. There is good monitoring of food and fluid intake to ensure residents do not become dehydrated, particularly in the recent heat wave. Accidents/falls are closely monitored and residents referred to a liaison nurse for support and advice. There is good monitoring and provision of health care needs with appropriate and prompt referral to GPs, district nurses and community psychiatric nurses. Positive feedback was received from both health and social care professionals. There are regular organisational audits undertaken to monitor and improve care practice. Staff said they were well supported by the manager. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Whilst the organisation is to be commended on the new menus recently introduced, feedback was received from a minority of residents that roast meat was frequently tough and potatoes were hard. Residents with diabetes also complained at the lack of available choice. Whilst the standards for administration and recording of medicines had improved one delay was identified in prescribed medicines being obtained. There remain some shortfalls in the standards of infection control and a malodorous smell was evident in two residents’ rooms and a communal room of the home. Staff hand washing facilities have been provided but some foot operated pedal bins are still needed. Staffing levels were found to be adequate at the site visit but there is no flexibility in the event of any untoward incidents. Several residents also raised concerns that they had to wait to receive assistance. Considerable investment has been made in staff training, however induction training needs to include infection control training and dealing with spillages. There are arrangements in place for the maintenance of electrical, gas and emergency safety and lift equipment. However whilst systems are in place to ensure that minor repairs are made, there have been delays to repairs, maintenance and refurbishment of the fabric of the building that require agreement of funding. Delays were also evident in replacement of damaged kitchen units and a dishwasher. Storage facilities remain limited and the conservatory is generally used for storage of equipment rather than accessed by residents. The registered person should consider increasing the number of registered dementia beds. This would enable admission of residents with a mild degree of Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 dementia and the appropriate transfer of existing residents from the dementia unit to the main area of the home when their dependency has evidently reduced on review. 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. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1, 3 & 6 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. Assessments were comprehensive and detailed all care needs. This home does not provide intermediate care. EVIDENCE: The home had a statement of purpose and a service user guide for the home that met the standard and was made available to prospective residents and their representatives. Four service user files were sampled. All had an assessment of needs undertaken by the manager/deputy manager prior to admission that included all elements as detailed under this standard. Care management assessments were obtained where relevant and held on file. The home had a link community psychiatric nurse who visited regularly to review those residents with a diagnosis of dementia and who was also available for advice and support. This home does not provide intermediate care. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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 & 10 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. The standards of care planning and healthcare were consistently good and residents were assured that their privacy and dignity would be upheld. Whilst the standards for administration and recording of medication were in the main good, more robust monitoring is needed to ensure no resident is without their prescribed medication. EVIDENCE: Four care plans were reviewed during the site visit. All were person centred and completed in detail. Risk assessments undertaken included individual risks; falls; moving & handling; pressure ulcers; continence; and nutrition. All risk assessments and care plans had been reviewed regularly. All had been appropriately reported, detailed in the care plan and changes made as necessary. Daily records were comprehensive and detailed good monitoring of needs and how the resident spent their day. The records confirmed evidence of good monitoring of health care needs with prompt referral to GPs and health care professionals and appropriate follow up action being taken. The home was supported by the local GP practice whose representative attended regularly and on request. There was evidence of Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 access to outpatient services, dental, chiropody and eye tests annually. District nurses and community psychiatric nurses attended as relevant. Positive feedback was received from a district nurse and community psychiatric nurse who were undertaking reviews of residents’ needs. The home is supported by a liaison nurse who provides advice and support on issues such as falls and acts as a link between hospital and community. The home had a policy and procedures for the safe administration and recording of medication. A drugs information book and a copy of the British National Formulary were available for staff guidance. The manager, deputy manager and care team managers had received training and had been assessed as competent to give medication. Medication was stored in separate medication rooms, one on the ground floor of the home and a larger clinical room on the first floor. The ground floor medication room was inspected. The room had an air conditioning unit installed and daily monitoring and recording of room temperatures was undertaken and recorded. The drug refrigerator was kept in the district nurses’ room nearby and was not checked on this occasion. Records inspected had a photograph of the resident and a medication profile on each individual record. Records sampled were well recorded and there was evidence of any omissions being monitored and followed up with the reason recorded. Medication reviews had recently been undertaken for 40 residents belonging to one GP practice. One resident was self-medicating for PRN paracetamol tablets and a risk assessment recorded with evidence that monitoring was undertaken to ensure compliance. Night care team managers were responsible for the ordering, receipt and return of medication and prescriptions were seen by them. There was no overstocking of medicines evident. However one resident had been without a prescribed medication for three weeks and this had not been followed up. Staff were observed to knock before entering residents’ rooms and to be respectful towards them. Residents spoken with said that staff were friendly but respected them, and addressed them by their preferred name. There were no shared rooms. All residents’ rooms were single en-suite accommodation and treatment was therefore provided in their room ensuring their privacy was respected. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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 site visit to the service. The social and therapeutic activities offered at the home met residents’ cultural needs and expectations and enhanced their daily lives. Visitors were warmly welcomed into the home. The home provided residents with a well-balanced and nutritious diet. EVIDENCE: The home had three part-time activities coordinators. Residents were assessed on admission and their preferences detailed together with their spiritual needs and any restrictions. There was a programme of activities displayed comprising group and individual e.g. bingo, dominoes, sing-along sessions, floor exercise games, videos, cake decoration and individual outings for residents as able. Some entertainment was organised subject to funding. A mobile shop was provided twice weekly to enable residents to purchase their own sweets, toiletries etc.. Fundraising was also raised through a bonus ball scheme that residents who chose to take part could win a prize. Grant monies had also been obtained in the last year that had been used to fund activities. The home had established links with Age Concern who invited residents to tea parties at the local public hall. However due to restrictions on volunteers being insured to manage residents in wheelchairs, this was now limited to those who Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 needed minimal assistance. Links were also established with the local sixth form college whose pupils attended on a regular basis. Activities were arranged both group and individual for residents in the dementia unit that were person centred. Daily records for all residents included the outcome of each activity undertaken by residents. One activity coordinator discussed some positive outcomes for residents. This included one resident with dementia who despite not playing for many years, was encouraged to play the piano and was clapped by other residents who had recognised her sense of achievement. Regular religious services were held at the home, and the local priest also visited to give communion. There were no restrictions on time of visiting and numerous visitors were seen to come and go throughout the inspection. Those spoken with said they were always made to feel welcome. Residents were observed to be enabled a choice in getting up, where they ate, to take part in activities and to stay in their own room or join other residents in the lounge. Some residents’ rooms were personalised with family photographs, pictures and small items of furniture as they had chosen. Information on advocacy service was displayed for information of residents and their representatives and the home had established links with Age Concern and the Alzheimer’s Society. New menus had been developed for the organisations’ homes with the assistance of a dietician. The menus observed were balanced and nutritious and detailed the nutritional values for each day and week. Residents spoken with said they enjoyed the new meals provided at the home. The lunchtime meal of sweet and sour pork with rice was sampled and was found to be tasty and the meat tender. Residents spoken with said they enjoyed the meal on the day, some choosing bean casserole as an alternative. However four residents said they frequently found the meat tough, particularly the roast meat served on Sundays, and the potatoes too hard. Care plans and nutritional records inspected detailed weight monitoring and action taken as needed. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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, 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. Residents have access to a robust, effective complaints procedure and are protected from abuse through the policies, procedures and practices. EVIDENCE: The home had a complaints procedure that included the timescales within which complainants can expect a response and advised them of their right to refer to the CSCI at any stage. The procedure was included in the statement of purpose and displayed in the entrance of the home. There had been two written complaints made ; one that required a review of residents’ needs and was not upheld and the second that was upheld for staff attitude and training to resolve this had subsequently been provided. Feedback from residents and their representatives indicated not all knew of the complaints’ procedure but they knew whom to complain to if they had an issue. The home had a protection of vulnerable adults policy and procedures and a whistle blowing policy. The records confirmed that staff had received training in protection of vulnerable adults. Those spoken with were aware of the procedures to be followed in the event of an allegation. There had been no allegations of abuse since the last inspection. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 26 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. Park View had a homely environment but delays in repair and maintenance in communal areas, detracted from the appearance and posed some health and safety risks. Residents’ rooms were individually furnished and equipped for their safety, comfort and privacy. The home was generally clean and hygienic but closer monitoring is needed to ensure unit kitchens are clean and malodorous smells are removed from the home. EVIDENCE: A partial inspection of the premises was made that included communal areas, several bathrooms, a number of residents’ rooms, the clinical room, the sluices and the laundry. In the main, the home was well decorated and maintenance for safety equipment (electrical, gas etc.) was current. However some damage to doorways and peeling wallpaper was observed. A broken kitchen unit door, drawer and a dishwasher, found in the Unit 2 at the last inspection had still not been repaired. The manager said funding had now been agreed for a Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 replacement dishwasher. Records provided evidence that the building complied with the requirements of the local fire and environmental health department. The premises were observed to be generally clean. However some attention to detail was needed. Conflicting feedback was received from residents: some said their rooms were always kept clean and others that they were not. The unit refrigerators were not adequately cleaned. There was no shelf in one of the kitchen units and dishes were therefore stored on the lower shelf of the unit, posing a health and safety risk for staff when accessing crockery. A malodorous smell was evident in one resident’s room and in one communal room on the first floor. The CSCI had received several complaints regarding the lack of availability of the required gloves to be used by staff when undertaking personal care. The manager had taken advice from the Health Protection Agency and an infection control nurse had provided training for staff. Due to some staff using gloves inappropriately the manager was closely monitoring their issue. However this meant that all care staff were required to request gloves via the office on the ground floor. The manager agreed to ensure gloves were more easily available for staff and confirmation was received on the day following the inspection that gloves were now available in the area that staff worked. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected 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 adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. Park View care staff are trained and skilled but are not always employed in sufficient numbers to meet the aims of the home and the changing needs of residents. Recruitment checks are robust and protect residents’ safety. EVIDENCE: There were 77 residents and 2 in hospital. Staffing levels were confirmed at: AM – 2 care team managers 11 care assistants PM – 2 care team manager 11 care assistants Night 1 care team manager 5 care assistants. Residents seen were observed to have had their personal care needs met. Discussion with staff indicated that having to undertake some domestic type duties, e.g. cleaning dining room tables and unit refrigerators, sweeping the floor following meals and washing some crockery impinged on the time available to undertake personal care and complete care documentation. Feedback from residents indicated that staff were kept very busy and they sometimes had to wait which was very frustrating, particularly when they needed assistance with personal care. The home had six staff who had NVQ level 2 training and a further six were undertaking it. Two care staff were also undertaking NVQ level 3. Staff who had previously received training had left employment and the percentage of staff with NVQ level 2 training was therefore less than 50 . Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The home had an established training programme. Training provided since the last inspection included moving and handling, fire safety, abuse, dementia, first aid, basic food hygiene, falls prevention, catheter care, pressure area care, medication, NVQ level 2. All new staff received a written induction. However feedback was received from a resident regarding the practices of one member of staff following which it was confirmed that no instruction had been given on infection control (dealing with spillages) during induction. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35, 37 & 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a site visit to the service. Park View is well managed and run in the best interests of residents. The financial interests of residents are protected by the robust systems that are well adhered to. EVIDENCE: The registered manager had been employed at the home for several years and was in the process of undertaking the Registered Managers Award. A deputy manager also provided support to the manager. Relatives spoken with said they found the manager very approachable and she kept them updated on any changes. Staff spoken with said they felt supported by the manager and she was always available. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 The home had a quality assurance programme whereby an annual audit was undertaken of the home and an action plan produced which formed the basis of an annual plan. This was reviewed at six months. Regular audits were undertaken of service areas and service user questionnaires distributed to residents to obtain feedback. The home monitored all complaints and compliments and also had a suggestion box for residents and visitors. Visits required under regulation 26 had been undertaken and reports sent to the CSCI. The home had appropriate procedures in place for the safe storage of residents’ monies. The records of four service user’s monies were inspected. All had receipts held for expenditure and records were confirmed by signature. The procedures were well adhered to and amounts held were confirmed as correct. All records held by the home were secure, up to date and stored in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.Records inspected at this inspection included: Maintenance of building and equipment; fire safety; care plans; residents’ monies; accident records; menus; nutritional records; activities records. The home had a health and safety policy statement and appropriate procedures in place and in the main these were adhered to. There was evidence from the home’s records and practices that the manager ensured so far as is reasonably practicable the health, safety and welfare of service users and staff. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 x 3 x x 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 4 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 2 X X X X X X 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 2 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X 3 3 Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 person must ensure that there are no delays in prescribed medication being obtained. This is a repeat requirement The registered person must ensure that malodorous smells are removed from the home. The registered person must ensure that foot operated pedal bins are provided for disposal of clinical waste. The registered person must ensure that refrigerators in unit kitchens are kept clean. The registered person must ensure that staffing levels are kept under review and meet the dependency needs of residents at all times. The registered person must ensure that all staff receive infection control (dealing with spillages) training during induction. Timescale for action 18/08/06 2. 3. OP26 OP26 13(3) 13(3) 18/08/06 18/08/06 4. 5. OP26 OP27 13(3) 18(1) 18/08/06 18/08/06 6. OP30 OP26 13(3) 18/08/06 Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 OP19 OP28 Good Practice Recommendations The registered person should provide an action plan to include timescales for redecoration of communal areas with damaged wallpaper. The registered person should ensure 50 care staff have NVQ level 2 training. Park View DS0000028381.V306361.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection Colchester Local Office 1st Floor, Fairfax House Causton Road Colchester Essex CO1 1RJ 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 Park View DS0000028381.V306361.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!