Inspection on 14/07/06 for Pendleton Court Care Centre

This inspection was carried out on 14th July 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. 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

Pendleton Court Care Centre 15/05/07

Pendleton Court Care Centre 27/02/07

Pendleton Court Care Centre 08/02/06

Pendleton Court Care Centre 28/06/05

Pendleton Court Care Centre 04/11/04

Pendleton Court Care Centre 29/06/04

Pendleton Court Care Centre 01/03/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Pendleton Court Care Centre 22 Chaplin Close Salford Manchester M6 8FW Lead Inspector Elizabeth Holt Key Unannounced Inspection 14th July 2006 10:00 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 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Pendleton Court Care Centre Address 22 Chaplin Close Salford Manchester M6 8FW Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 0161 743 9798 0161 737 8080 Southern Cross Home Properties Limited Care Home 58 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (56), Physical disability (2) of places Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. 4. The number of persons requiring nursing care at any one time shall not exceed 25 older persons, aged 65 years and over. That the number of persons requiring accommodation for personal care only at any one time shall not exceed 38 older persons aged 60 years and over within the overall maximum occupancy of 58. The service users requiring nursing care may be accommodated on the ground floor only. 2 named individuals requiring nursing care as a result of physical disability are accommodated on the ground floor. The registration will revert to older people if either of the service users leave or reach the age of 65. 8th February 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Pendleton Court Care Centre is a care home registered to provide accommodation for up to 37 older people requiring nursing care and 21 places for older people requiring personal care only. The home is owned by Highfield Home Properties Limited. The home is a converted mansion house situated in an elevated position at the rear of a residential estate. The home provides accommodation on two floors in single en-suite bedrooms. A passenger lift provides access to each floor. The home is within walking distance of a local park and shops. The home is close to the local bus routes into Manchester city centre and Salford/Eccles and is close to the motorway network. The current scale of charges at the home are £355-52 to £425 per week. Costs in addition to the fee are hairdressing, chiropody(private) and newspapers. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 14th July 2006 and a further visit was made on the 18th July 2006. All the core National Minimum Standards (NMS) were reviewed during this inspection. Information was gathered as part of the inspection process which included a questionnaire completed by the manager which gave information about the residents, the staff and the building. Information held by the Commission, for example, notifications of significant incidents was also reviewed. Time was spent talking to the residents, visiting relatives, the manager and the staff team about day to day life in the home and to establish what the home was like for the residents living there. A partial tour of the premises was undertaken and examination of documents and care files for the individual residents. Five of the ten resident/relatives questionnaires which were left to be forwarded to the Commission were returned. Comments from these have been included in this report. The Commission for Social Care Inspection had investigated one complaint under the Adult Protection procedures since the last inspection. Following this investigation the home were required to review their admission assessment to ensure the home can fully meet the needs of a prospective resident. The previous report should be read together with this one to get a better picture of the care being provided at the home, as the Commission For Social Care Inspection only looked at the key standards during this inspection visit. What the service does well: The relationships between the residents and the staff were generally friendly and chatty. Relatives were met during the inspection and it was clear they had an open visiting policy. One relative said, “The staff are very kind and considerate, they will help me at anytime.” The manager was reported to be approachable and knew the residents well. The home maintained a good standard of cleanliness and the management of odour was good. A choice of menu is available and staff did make an effort to make mealtimes a sociable occasion. Residents who could express a view were positive about the food provided. The kitchen was well stocked with fresh and frozen food. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The home encourages and supports the care staff to undertake NVQ level 2 training. Accidents were appropriately recorded. The home show a commitment to staff development and training. The home continued to provide a relaxed, friendly environment with activities to satisfy the recreational needs of the residents. 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. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 and 6 Quality in this area outcome is adequate. This judgement has been made using evidence made available and following a visit to the home. Prospective residents are assessed before an offer of a place is made to the home however the documentation was not fully completed by the home which means that residents’ needs might not be fully met. EVIDENCE: The files of two residents who were recently admitted to the home were examined. A pre admission assessment form is used to record the assessment carried out on a prospective resident. For one of these residents the available documentation including the new admission checklist and the draft care plan were not completed. Residents who were admitted to the home by a social worker had an assessment of need completed by the social worker. The assessment process included involvement of the prospective resident when possible, their representative and relevant professionals. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 The manager showed relatives of a prospective resident around the home during the course of this inspection. The manager had already been out to assess the needs of the prospective resident. The home does not provide intermediate care therefore standard 6 was not relevant. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 Quality in this area outcome is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Each resident had an individual plan of care, however some areas of the care plans required improvements to ensure the residents’ health, personal and social care needs are fully met. Some of the medication practices were poor and shortfalls had the potential to put residents at risk. EVIDENCE: A sample of care plans were examined. Some serious concerns were identified during a review of the care plans. A requirement made at the last inspection involved the need for the care plans to accurately reflect the resident’s assessed needs and to provide current, relevant information regarding the interventions required in order to meet those needs effectively. There was some evidence of slight improvement however the majority of the care plans were written by the manager herself and some serious shortfalls were noted. A discussion with the manager Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 highlighted the need for the staff delivering the care to be fully involved in the recording and reporting in the care plans. The care plans did not always detail the specific action required of the staff to meet the resident’s needs. A number of risk assessments were incomplete. The evaluations regularly stated “care to continue” and did not reflect on any change in the resident’s healthcare need. Risk assessments mist be specific and detailed and include the procedure to be followed in the event of an untoward incident and the suitability of the residents going on holiday. Care plans written in relation to wound care and its management were detailed and clearly recorded and evaluated. Input from the tissue viability nurse had been actioned. On the personal care only floor it was of concern that one of the residents legs was observed to be swollen, not elevated and the bandages were tight. Only after the staff were advised of the potential risks to the resident was action taken. This highlights a training need for the staff to ensure the health care needs of the residents are met, to be aware of when to seek advice from other professionals and to ensure appointments with healthcare professionals are followed through. One resident was observed to have a high temperature and his oral hygiene needs had not been met. This was of detriment to the welfare of this resident and it was of concern that it took a number of requests for the staff to address this resident’s needs. Examination of the medication administration records showed a number of shortfalls. Although a new system had been introduced in June 2006 a number of problems were highlighted with this system. Medications were not always signed into the home on the MAR charts. There was no staff specimen signature list available for the nursing floor. The nurse responsible for administering the medication on the morning of the inspection had left a gap for one of the residents and she commented after lunch that she was going to try to offer this resident the medication again. This practice is not in line with the prescriber’s instructions or the Nursing and Midwifery Councils guidelines. Other gaps were noted on the MAR charts where staff had failed to sign these. Three residents had not been administered their prescribed medications for up to 14 days. A requirement was made for these serious concerns to be resolved immediately. The drugs trolley was not appropriate for the individual system of medication now being provided and a requirement was made for this to be replaced. It was pleasing to see that following the notice of immediate requirement being left for the home to act upon the identified serious concerns regarding Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 medication, the manager carried out a full audit of the home’s medication on the 14th July 2006. Staff training was carried out on the 18th July 2006, which included the recording on the medication administration records (MAR). Residents were registered with local General Practitioners and there was evidence of visits from other visiting healthcare professionals. A visiting district nurse was positive about the attitude of the staff when she visited. From observations made during the inspection and discussions with staff members and residents it appeared that the nurses and care staff treated the residents with respect and dignity. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, and 15 Quality in this area outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Activities were provided and residents were encouraged to maintain contact with family and friends. Residents could exercise some choice over their daily lives and received a balanced and nutritious diet. EVIDENCE: The activities coordinator continued to provide 10 hours per week and residents were seen enjoying a game of bingo in the afternoon of the inspection. The home had a display board showing photographs of recent social events and planned activities. A garden party was being arranged for the day after the inspection. There was evidence particularly noticeable on the first floor of the staff spending time sitting and talking with the residents. The care plans did not always show the activities carried out however social assessments were available in the care plans examined. On the nursing floor two members of the care team were seen to talk over the residents in their first language which was not English. One of the residents did comment that the staff had “cliques” and did not regularly make an effort Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 to chat. These concerns were discussed with the manager and a recommendation was made for staff training in communication skills. The home had an open visiting policy and visitors could be received in the residents’ own room or any of the communal areas of the home. Residents, relatives and staff spoken to confirmed this. Ministers visited the home to bring some residents Holy Communion and one resident said how she attended Mass and the staff assisted her to do this. Discussions with residents and staff showed that residents could exercise some choice and control over their daily lives. Bedrooms were seen to have personal possessions and conversations with staff showed this was encouraged. Menus had been developed in line with residents’ likes and dislikes. A resident said that “Staff always cut my food up for me. I like soup in a cup as I haven’t got good eyesight. I tell them the food I like and they give it to me, no problems.” The menu on display in the entrance hall was not up to date and there was no menu of the day displayed in the dining room. Staff confirmed that residents were offered the choice of meal at the time the meal was served. Residents who could express a view said the food was good. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 and 18 Quality in this area outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has the systems and procedures in place that allow people to express their complaints/concerns and to protect residents from abuse. EVIDENCE: A policy was in place for the protection of vulnerable adults and staff were aware of how to put the policy into practice. Staff spoken to were aware of how to act in the event of an allegation of abuse and the manager has cascaded Adult Protection training to all staff. The home had a complaints procedure. The manager kept a record of complaints, which included details of the investigation and the responses. Staff commented they felt safe to Whistle Blow if the need arose. Two investigations have been conducted by Salford Social Services with the involvement of the Commission for Social Care Inspection into the home’s management of two incidents involving residents. One staff member has ceased employment at the home following this investigation. It was concluded that there was some poor practice in the recording of the care planning, the provision of individual risk assessments prior to residents going on holiday from the home and the staffs’ management of the incident. Requirements were made to address these shortfalls. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 and 26 Quality in this area outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The premises were clean and comfortable for the residents living there. EVIDENCE: A programme is in place to redecorate and refurbish the home as an ongoing process. The décor and furnishings were homely in nature and the residents’ bedrooms were seen to be comfortable and personalised. A tour of the premises highlighted that bedroom 50 could benefit from replacing the carpet. A cleaning programme is in place and the home was clean and free from odour. A discussion with relatives and comments made in the resident/relatives questionnaires highlighted a number of concerns with the laundry. Relatives Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 commented that at times their relative was dressed in someone else’s clothes and a considerable number of items had gone missing. A visit to the laundry highlighted there was a considerable backlog of washing to be done. The manager stated they had experienced staff shortages however new staff had been recruited. The home must ensure that fire exits are kept clear of any furniture awaiting to be removed from the premises. The manager stated this was due for removal from the ground floor. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 and 30 Quality in this area outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence and a visit to the home. The number, deployment and training of staff appeared sufficient to meet the residents’ assessed needs. Robust procedures for staff recruitment were in place to protect residents. EVIDENCE: At the time of the inspection the home provided care and accommodation for 20 residents requiring nursing care and 35 residents in receipt of personal care only. On the day of the inspection the staffing numbers and skill mix appeared appropriate to meet the needs of the residents accommodated. The home employs 24 care assistants with 15 members of staff having successfully achieved NVQ level 2. The staff receive training that allows them to do their work appropriately. Residents and relatives commented and reported in the questionnaires that;” The manager is very nice and very approachable. She has a good attitude towards the residents and is always very friendly and chatty.” A resident said, “I can always talk to the staff about almost anything. I have trust and confidence in them. If I have something that is bothering me, they will help me in everyway possible and this is reassuring to me.” Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Staff files contained the the required information needed to be kept at the home. Documents that were available included application forms, references, Criminal Records Bureau checks (CRB) and training records. A structured staff induction programme was available and a staff member confirmed she had followed an induction programme. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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, 33, 35, 36 and 38 Quality in this area outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has the systems in place to monitor the service based on people’s views. The health, safety and welfare of residents’ was promoted. EVIDENCE: The manager is fully aware of her responsibilities and demonstrated her knowledge of the residents well, however a completed application form to be registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection has not yet been received. A requirement was made at the previous inspection for this and the manager has said this is in process. The requirement has been reiterated. Policies and procedures were in place to protect the personal allowances of the residents accommodated. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 One relative commented that communication and the staff following her concerns through was difficult for her. Procedures are in place to find out from the people who use the service what they think of it. A recommendation was made that comment cards are sent to visiting professionals in order to obtain their opinion of the service being delivered. A system was in place for the formal supervision of care staff. Staff spoken to confirmed this was carried out. Fire maintenance safety checks were being carried out in line with the guidance. Regular fire drills were recorded. Following an Environmental Health and Safety Inspection in May 2006 the outstanding requirement was for the provision of additional artificial lighting to the area around the deep fat fryer area of the kitchen. Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.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 x x 2 x x N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 X 3 x 3 3 x 3 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 yes Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? 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 OP3 Regulation 14 Requirement Pre admission assessments must be undertaken and the outcomes of these clearly recorded to ensure that the service is able to meet the needs of the prospective resident. A full audit of all care plans must be undertaken within the given timescale. Service user plans must demonstrate that the home is able to meet the residents needs. They must reflect all the residents assessed needs and provide current, relevant information regarding the interventions required in order to meet those needs effectively. Daily entries in the care plans must be clear and consistent. (The previous timescale of 30/06/06 has not been met.) Risk assessments must contain appropriate detail and be included in the plan of care. (The previous timescale of the 30/05/06 has not been met). DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 01/09/06 2. OP7 15 04/09/06 3. OP7 15 04/09/06 Pendleton Court Care Centre Version 5.2 Page 25 4 5 OP8 OP9 12 13 All staff must receive training to ensure the health care needs of the residents are fully met. The Registered Person must make arrangements for the recording, handling, safekeeping and safe administration of medicines. The registered person must ensure that nurses administering medication must be assessed as competent to carry out this task. The registered person must ensure that any medication which has been prescribed for a resident is provided for them. The registered person must ensure that an appropriate trolley for the storage of medication is provided. An application must be submitted to the Commission for registration of the manager. (The previous timescale of the 22/05/06 has not been met). The home is required to supply the Commission for Social care Inspection with an action plan to demonstrate how they intend to meet the outstanding requirement made during the Environmental Health Services visit in May 2005. (The previous timescale of 22/05/06 has not been fully met). 15/09/06 30/08/06 6. OP31 9 22/09/06 7. OP38 23 22/09/06 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 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 OP23 Good Practice Recommendations It is strongly recommended that the temperatures of the rooms are monitored to ensure they are at an ambient temperature. It is strongly recommended that an audit of the staff’s response times to the call system be made. It is strongly recommended that the staffing levels are reviewed to ensure the needs of the residents are met. 2. 3. OP22 OP27 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ 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 Pendleton Court Care Centre DS0000006726.V301961.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!