Inspection on 10/05/05 for Popis Gardens (1 & 2)

This inspection was carried out on 10th May 2005.

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

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 16/03/09

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 26/03/07

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 29/11/05

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 27/11/04

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 21/06/04

Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 15/01/04

Similar services:

Coopers Mill Ltd

Bramley Avenue (73)

Paradise Lodge

Grangewood

Upaya Ananda

Newton Court (1-2)

Kings Lane (32)

Pemdale

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Popis Gardens (1 & 2) King George Road Ware Hertfordshire SG12 7DU Lead Inspector Claire Farrier Unannounced 10 May 2005 13:15 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 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 Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationary 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. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Popis Gardens (1 & 2) Address King George Road Ware Hertfordshire SG12 7DU 01920 485030 01920 462732 Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Granta Housing Society Limited Care Home 10 Category(ies) of LD Learning Disability 10 registration, with number LD(E) Learning Disability over 65 10 of places PD Physical Disability 10 PD(E) Physical Disability over 65 10 Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: There are no additional conditions of registration. Date of last inspection 27 November 2004 Brief Description of the Service: 1 & 2 Popis Gardens is a care home providing personal care and accommodation for ten people with a learning disability, who may also be aged over 65 and have a physical disability. It is owned by Granta Housing Society, which is a voluntary organisation, and it was opened in 1993. The home is situated in a residential area of Ware, within easy reach of the shops, pubs and other community facilities of the town centre. It consists of two purpose-built bungalows, situated in their own cul-de-sac. Each bungalow has five single bedrooms, none of which have en-suite facilities. Both the bungalows are fully accessible for wheelchairs, and both have accessible gardens. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was the first unannounced inspection of the inspection year and took place over one Thursday afternoon. The majority of time was spent observing and talking to residents and staff. Some time was also spent looking at care plans, risk assessments, complaints and staff files. Seven residents and four members of staff were spoken to during the inspection, and discussions were held with the home’s new manager. The staff and residents were very welcoming, and one resident showed the inspector around her home. This was generally a positive inspection, and the majority of the standards were met. A requirement was to improve the involvement of residents in their care plans. A requirement was repeated from a previous inspection report on staff records, and enforcement action may be considered if this is not met. What the service does well: 2 Popis Gardens was out of use for five months due to leaks in the under floor pipes. The residents moved to other homes for this period, and had returned to the home shortly before this inspection took place. The bungalow has been completely renovated to a high standard, and now provides an attractive and comfortable environment for the residents. The residents who were disrupted for the repairs and refurbishment said that they like the improvements in their home. They were well looked after in their temporary homes, and staff from Popis Gardens visited them frequently and ensured that all their needs were met. All the residents spoken said that they are happy in their home, and the staff assist them to be involved in residents meetings and to take decisions about their lives, including choosing activities and holidays and shopping for and preparing food. The staff were observed to have a good relationship with the residents, and to enable them to express their views. Granta has a comprehensive system for quality assurance in its homes, which includes annual surveys of residents and their families on different topics. The care plans and risk assessments are well written with clear details of all the residents needs. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users’ know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1 and 2 Appropriate information in the form of the Statement of Purpose and Service Users Guide is available for the residents and their families concerning how the home operates and what procedures are in place to meet their care needs. It is being reviewed so that the information will be in a format that the residents of Popis Gardens can more easily understand. Assessments are carried out to ensure that the staff have sufficient information on each person’s needs before they move into the home. EVIDENCE: Granta is in the process of reviewing and updating the home’s Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide. Some thought has been given on how to make the Service Users’ Guide more accessible to the residents of Popis Gardens. Most of them do not understand Widget symbols, and alternative means of communicating the information are considered. No new residents have been admitted to the home since the last inspection. The file of the person who was admitted most recently contained a full assessment, and a Social Services assessment. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate, in all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 6, 7, 8 and 9 The residents’ care plans contain detailed information on all their personal care and health care needs, and comprehensive risk assessments related to each individual, which enable the staff to provide a good quality of care. The staff were observed to treat the residents with respect and to assist them to make choices about their lives, and to participate in residents meetings. However the care plans do not reflect this involvement. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 EVIDENCE: Detailed case tracking was carried out through the files of two residents in each bungalow. The care plans are well written, with good details of all the residents’ personal care needs and of their likes and dislikes. The format of the care action plans and risk assessments provides clear and comprehensive information on all the resident’s needs. Each need is detailed on a separate sheet, with an action plan that includes the goal to be achieved and the action needed to achieve it. A risk assessment is attached to each care action plan, which details the activity involved together with the benefits and risks to the residents and staff and any emergency action that may be needed. Some of the areas covered are bathing and dressing, use of the hoist for transfers, social development, development of language skills and management of epilepsy. The risk assessments contain a section for the resident’s view. In several cases this has not been completed, and in others it has evidently been completed by the staff with their understanding of the resident’s views. For example “….is always pleased to go out in the wheelchair”, “….is very sociable and appreciates efforts made to assist him to communicate and live in the community”. The care plans and risk assessments have not been signed by the resident or their representative, and there is no evidence that they have been reviewed and revised when needed. The format of the care action plans and risk assessments provides a basis for a person centred planning (PCP) approach, but there is no evidence that the whole concept of PCP has been addressed, which should focus on the person being totally at the centre of all planning, including how the process is carried out. Each resident has their own bank account, but their benefits, including DLA (disability living allowance) mobility allowance are paid direct to Granta. The personal allowance aspect of benefits is used to pay for the resident’s clothing, toiletries, activities and holidays, and it is not given directly to the residents. The DLA is used to fund the home’s two minibuses. There is no evidence that individual service users have agreed to their benefit being used in this way, and there is no individual account kept of how their money is used for their individual benefit. The proprietor’s response to the previous inspection report was that an agreement is in place with Social Services that residents’ DLA money can be used to provide transport. There is no evidence in the home of this agreement, nor of the agreement of individual service users to this practice. The minutes of regular residents’ meetings show that the residents who are able to take turns to chair the meetings. The discussions include plans for activities and holidays. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 The residents are encouraged to make choices for their activities, and to be involved according to their abilities in developing their skills for independence. This ensures good relationships with their families and with the local community, and that individual rights and responsibilities are recognised and supported. EVIDENCE: The residents take part in their own choice of activities, either individually or in groups. One resident said that he enjoys going swimming, and this is recorded in his care plan. The activities and outings that each service user takes part in are recorded in their care plans, and the care plans include each person’s choice of activities. Most of the residents attend a day centre, and activities in the local community are arranged on a one-to-one basis by Guideposts. Guideposts take each service user out for three half days a week, and the activities taken part in include boating, going to the cinema and bowling. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 The residents plan their holidays and who they would like to go with. Their personal allowance is used on their behalf to pay for their activities and holidays (see Standard 7), and they also pay for all the expenses of the staff who accompany them. This issue was raised in previous inspections, and the response of Granta was that funding for holidays has been discussed with commissioners who have not been favourable to the proposal that residents should not pay for the expenses for staff. However this means that residents have very minimal control over how to spend their own money as it is used on their behalf for activities and holidays, in addition to the transport and personal needs as detailed under Standard 7. Staff respect the residents’ privacy and support them to be as independent as possible. Daily living activities are written in the care plan as goals. One resident showed the inspector around the bungalow and said that she cleans her own room and takes part in shopping and cooking. She explained the menus that are displayed on the fridge, and said that the residents choose what they want to eat. There is a daily menu book with pictures of favourite foods and meals to assist the residents to make their choices. Each resident’s meal choices are recorded every day, and the amount eaten is monitored if there is any concern about weight loss or healthy eating. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 18 and 19 The staff provide good quality personal care and treat the residents with sensitivity and respect. There is good recording of all the residents’ health care needs. EVIDENCE: The care plans that were inspected provide comprehensive details of the residents’ personal care and health care needs (see Standard 6), and a good relationship was observed between the staff and the residents. The residents in 2 Popis Gardens moved to other homes while the essential work on the bungalow was completed. Staff from Popis Gardens visited them frequently, and ensured that their needs were known and met appropriately. Detailed recording of each resident’s health care includes health notes for hospital visits and contact with GPs and other medical professionals and appropriate monitoring of epilepsy. One resident has complex health needs and several regular hospital appointments. Full details of these are recorded. One resident has a care action plan for weight reduction, but there was no evidence of her weight being monitored. However she has only recently moved back to the home, and it was reported that her weight was monitored while she was away and that she had lost weight. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 22 Residents are encouraged and enabled to make their views and concerns known. EVIDENCE: The Granta complaints leaflet is not in a format that most of the residents can understand, and it does not include the advice that CSCI can be contacted at any stage of the proceedings. It was reported that Granta has a computer programme to produce information such as the complaints procedure in widget format. However most of the residents of Popis Gardens are unable to understand widget. When a new resident is admitted the complaints procedure is explained to them, and the staff encourage and enable the residents to make their views and concerns known. The complaints record showed that the last complaint made was in August 2004, when a resident complained that another person had been abusive. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 24 and 30 The home provides a comfortable and well maintained environment for the residents, and the staff maintain a good standard of cleanliness and hygiene. EVIDENCE: The under floor pipes in 2 Popis Gardens leaked, causing severe dampness and damage in the house. This was discovered during the last inspection, and two days later the residents were moved out so that the damage could be repaired. The bungalow remained out of use until April, and the residents moved back in shortly before this inspection took place. The bungalow has been completely refurbished, with new flooring throughout, complete redecoration and a new kitchen. Laminate flooring has been fitted in the hallway, dining room and kitchen, liquid vinyl flooring in the laundry, bathroom and toilet and carpets in the lounge and bedrooms. The bungalow looks bright and attractive, and the residents spoken to said that they were delighted with the improvements. The carpet that was in the dining room of 1 Popis gardens has also been replaced with vinyl flooring that matches the kitchen. One of the residents showed the inspector round her home, and she said that the new dining room floor is much better as the carpet that was there before wasn’t suitable because it got too dirty. Both bungalows appeared to be very clean with a good standard of hygiene. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 35 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 33, 34 and 35 The home is staffed by experienced support workers who are appropriately trained to meet the needs of the residents. The staff spoken to are confident of their knowledge of the needs of the residents and feel well supported in their work. The staffing records required by the Regulations are not maintained in the home. It is therefore not possible to verify that service users are protected by robust recruitment procedures. EVIDENCE: The staffing rotas showed that in each bungalow there are two care workers throughout the day, from 7.30am to 10.00pm, and one during the night. One person also sleeps in to provide extra support if needed. During the five months that 2 Popis Gardens was closed for repairs and refurbishment the staff worked in bungalow 1, and also provided support to the residents who were moved temporarily to other establishments. The manager is continuing this flexibility, with new rotas for the staff to work across both bungalows. This provides a stronger permanent staff team for the residents, as they get to know all the home’s staff and the staff to know the needs of all the residents. When there was a completely separate staff team for each bungalow it was not easy for them to cover for each other as they did not know the residents in the other bungalow. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 The staff spoken to during this inspection had no concerns about this change to their working pattern, but it was reported that some staff were not happy and a few had resigned. A staff meeting was due to be held the following week to discuss their concerns about the changes. The staff spoken to confirmed that Granta provides a satisfactory training programme that includes all the mandatory health and safety training. A new member of staff had completed a three week induction programme, which included a week of formal training at Granta head office. The files of three members of staff who had started work in the home during the past year were inspected. None contained all the required information, including evidence of identity, satisfactory references and evidence of a satisfactory CRB (Criminal Record Bureau) disclosure. One did not contain the application form, and the others contained only part of the application form, with no indication of the person’s employment history. Two contained no evidence of identity. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. 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 are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 37, 39 and 42 The management within the home is secure and effective ensuring that the needs of the residents are met and that the home meets its aims and objectives. The quality assurance system ensures that views of the residents and their families underpin all self-monitoring, review and development of the home. EVIDENCE: A new manager has been appointed to the home, and the process of registration was completed shortly after this inspection. She was assistant manager at another Granta home before being appointed to Popis Gardens and she has many years experience in social care. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 Granta has a comprehensive system for quality assurance in its homes, which includes annual surveys of residents and their families on different topics. The most recent survey was on residents’ participation. The report and results of this survey are provided to the residents and their families and to CSCI, and will be included in the home’s development plan. Some of the recorded comments that are also reflected in the findings of this inspection were that residents would like more money to spend on shopping, and that families are not involved in planning the care and support of their relative. The residents were reported as feeling happy and supported in the home, and the families felt that the service offered at Popis gardens was to a high standard. The home maintains appropriate records with the exception of staffing records, for the health and safety of the residents and staff in the home, and staff follow the home’s policies and procedures. All the staff have training in moving and handling, fire safety, food hygiene and infection control as part of their induction. One minor discrepancy was observed. In 1 Popis Gardens there were opened packets of cold meat in the fridge that were not marked with the date of opening. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 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 CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score 3 3 x x x Standard No 22 23 ENVIRONMENT Score x x INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 LIFESTYLES Score 2 2 3 3 x Score Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 x x x x x 3 Standard No 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 x 3 3 3 3 3 3 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score x x 3 2 3 x CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Popis Gardens (1 & 2) Score 3 3 x x Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 x 3 x x 2 x I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 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 6&7 Regulation 12(2) Requirement Care plans must demonstrate the involvement of the residents, or where this is impracticable, their representative. Regular reviews must be carried out to ensure that the care plans reflect the residents changing needs. All the required information on staff must be kept in the home, including references, proof of identity and evidence of satisfactory CRB checks. Previous timescale of 31.7.04 not met. Enforcement action may be considered if this requirement is not met within the new timescale. Timescale for action 30 September 2005 2. 34 & 42 17(2) 19(1)(b), Schedule 2 Schedule 4 30 September 2005 3. 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 7 Good Practice Recommendations Residents should be able to decide how to use their own personal allowances and DLA mobility benefit. The I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 Popis Gardens (1 & 2) 2. 22 3. 42 residents should pay only for their own costs for holidays and activities, and not for the staff that accompany them. This recommendation has been repeated from previous inspection reports. The proprietor’s response to the previous inspection report was that funding for holidays has been discussed with commissioners, who have not been favourable to the proposal that residents should not pay for the expenses for staff, and that an agreement is in place with Social Services that residents’ DLA money can be used to provide transport. There is no evidence in the home of this agreement, nor of the agreement of individual residents to this practice. This recommendation has therefore been repeated. The complaints procedure should be produced in a format that the service users can understand. This recommendation has been repeated from the previous inspection report. It was reported that this is currently in progress. The complaints policy should include the information that a complaint can be referred to CSCI at any stage of the proceedings. Opened packets of fresh food should be marked with the date of opening. Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Mercury House 1 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City AL7 3BQ 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 Popis Gardens (1 & 2) I52 s19498 popis gardens v227039 100505 stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 24 - 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!