Inspection on 10/10/07 for 38 Redgate Court

This inspection was carried out on 10th October 2007.

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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 2 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

38 Redgate Court 28/11/06

38 Redgate Court 10/05/06

38 Redgate Court 07/02/06

38 Redgate Court 14/09/05

38 Redgate Court 14/02/05

38 Redgate Court 06/09/04

38 Redgate Court 19/03/04

Similar services:

Coopers Mill Ltd

Pocklington House

Bramley Avenue (73)

Paradise Lodge

Grangewood

Upaya Ananda

Newton Court (1-2)

Kings Lane (32)

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Redgate Court (38) Peterborough PE1 4XZ Lead Inspector Mr Neil Fernando Unannounced Inspection 10th October 2007 10:30 Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.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 Adults 18-65. 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. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Redgate Court (38) Address Peterborough PE1 4XZ 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) 01733 313501 01733 313501 www.sense.org.uk Sense, The National Deafblind and Rubella Association Sally Porteious Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Learning disability (6), Sensory impairment (6) registration, with number of places Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. LD only in association with SI Date of last inspection 28th November 2006 Brief Description of the Service: 38 Redgate Court consists of a purpose built property, situated on a residential estate on the north - eastern edge of Peterborough. The home is a two-storey, semi-detached property in an accommodation complex catering for adults with learning disability. It is owned by Sense and provides care and support for up to 6 people with learning disability, associated with sensory impairment. Fees for the home range between £1,287.63 and £1,777.05 per week. The home has 6 individual bedrooms; 5 on the upper floor and 1 on the ground floor. There is a bathroom with shower and toilet on both floors, an open planned lounge dining area and a kitchen. There is a conservatory leading to the large, well-maintained garden, which is shared with the adjoining house. The home is within walking distance of local shops, pubs, a post-office and public transport. Peterborough city centre is about 5 miles away and is easily accessed by public transport. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. We, the Commission for Social Care Inspection, undertook this unannounced key inspection on 10 October 2007. We spoke with 2 residents, the manager and 2 members of staff. We had a look round the building and checked some of the records the home must keep. We received a completed AQAA (Annual Quality Assurance Assessment) – a document, which gives the manager the opportunity to tell us how the home is meeting the standards and regulations and surveys from relatives and staff. No completed surveys have been received from residents; any feedback would be included in the next inspection report. The inspection indicated that the home was running well, with a calm atmosphere and reasonably settled residents being cared for by confident, well-trained and motivated staff. Overall, residents and relatives were satisfied with the quality of the service offered to their relatives. Their comments have been included in the report. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 There were two requirements and four recommendations made in the last inspection report dated 28 November 2006; these have been met. The home has continued to improve and maintain good standards of care. The views of the people who use the service and their representatives are sought in a number of ways including participation in self - assessment, care plan reviews, annual surveys and through choice and decision making processes. Both residents spoken with were very positive about the service, the staff team and the manager; they said that they were happy living at this home. Written consent is obtained from the resident’s representative and the nurse advisor of the Sense organisation, for staff to administer medication to people who live at the home. The medication systems have been reviewed to include security, written policy and procedures, risk assessments, self - medication, temperature records and clearer documentation for over the counter medicines. Information that the home must obtain before a person starts working there has improved. Not all of the required information was available in the home during the last inspection undertaken in November 2006. Health and safety, and routine maintenance checks now include indoor and outdoor areas accessible to residents. 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standard 2 and 4 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The home makes sure it can meet people’s needs by getting detailed information about new residents before they are offered a place. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Two residents who were spoken to said they had visited the home before moving in. Both people said that they liked living at this home. Staff said that they would help the prospective resident decide if the home is suitable for them. Many residents have lived at 38 redgate Court for a number of years; indeed, there have been no new admission to the home in the last couple of years. Care files for two people show that when the home receives a new referal, a detailed assessment of needs is completed involving the assessment officer from Sense, the potential resident, family, care manager and other important people. The registered manager should be included in the initial stage of the pre-admission assessment rather than in the middle of this process. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 We learn from staff members that prospective residents have the opportunity to visit the home for a cup of tea, a meal or over night stays until a decision could be made about whether they could live at the home or not. This is because the communication difficulties and challenging behaviours experienced by people who live at this home could sometimes mean that even if individual needs could be met, this would not be in the best interest of people already living at this home. Overall, evidence shows that the home is careful to only offer a place to the resident whose needs and aspirations it can meet. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 6, 7, and 9. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Care plans are detailed and identify what assistance is needed to enable the residents to be treated as an individual within the home. The risk assessments are appropriate and up to date. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Information collected shows that each resident’s care plan is drawn up from a range of assessment of needs including care manager’s reports, staff on going assessments, contributions from family and friends and other important people. The care plans for two people using the service were viewed; each person has a very detailed person centred care plan, which identifies how they would like Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 their individual needs to be addressed. Records also show that residents have their care plans reviewed every six months. It is clear from the manager, staff members and records that they seek to involve residents in all aspects of their care. Staff members spoken with were aware of the identified needs of residents and how these needs were being addressed. Staff members write detailed daily notes, which give very good information about the way each person has spent their day. Residents also know that they can read what staff members write in their notes, if they so wish. All members of staff have received training on how to complete risk assessments that enable a deaf/blind person to undertake an activity. Risk assessments have been carried out and updated regularly for all residents. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The range of social and recreational activities being facilitated assist in the development and promote the welfare of residents. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Each resident has a person centred care plan that reflect their needs, including race, gender identity, disability, age, religion and belief. All staff members receive training on these issues as part of their induction programme. Clear information exists regarding the disabilities of the deaf/blind persons and how staff adapt their practice to meet the persons’ specific needs and promote their abilities. For example, two deaf/blind people attend church on a regular basis. Residents attend day placement and workshop activities. Staff members work very closely with each placement to ensure consistency and continuity. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 It is positive that an activities programme for residents has been introduced. A range of activities to suit the individual person is facilitated. Activities include swimming, bowling, local events, visits to the local pubs, clubs and entertainment venues. Individuals follow their own routines when they are at home including being involved in household tasks. Residents maintain good contact with their families. Menus are planned with the residents and information is available in pictorial form to assist them make decisions. Consideration is given to individual nutritional needs so that residents have access to healthy options. Residents are pro-actively encouraged to eat together and make meal time an enjoyable social occasion. Relatives expressed a high level of satisfaction regarding the services offered except one person who made the following observations: a) “We think the service offers opportunities outside the home – but there seem many times when the service users are all just sitting in front of the TV”. b) “At weekends I have seen several meals with sausages, baked beans and chips” Encouragement to do more activities and preference for more fish and green vegetables has been suggested by the relative. It is suggested the manager should look into the above issues and take action as necessary. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 18, 19 and 20. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Good quality health and personal care is provided and recorded daily in great detail within the care plans. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: A separate file is kept for each person living at the home regarding health issues and medication. The residents have access to a range of healthcare professionals, such as a behavioural specialist, district nurses, dentists, GP’s and some are also registered with a psychiatrist. The way in which personal care should be provided is recorded in the care plans. This had been reviewed on a regular basis and amended as the needs of the resident changed. This information is shared within the care staff team to ensure continuity of care. Completed surveys from Relatives indicate that they are overall very happy with the personal and health care support available to their relatives. Examples include “Excellent care. Working as a family home Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 unit – cooking cleaning, learning, leisure and work all good”; “Her personal care is excellent – especially good haircuts; “I am quite satisfied with everything they do at 38 Redgate Court”. However, one relative would appreciate fresh clothes for their relative more frequently. Records show when there had been contact with health and social care professionals and what advice had been given. The people currently accommodated are unable to manage their own medication. There are safe systems in place to support residents who take prescribed medication to ensure it is stored and given in line with the GP’s written instructions. Medication administration sheets for three residents were viewed and these were in order. All staff that administer medication have received training from the manager. Risk assessments are in place with regards to the location of where medication is administered. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 22 and 23 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Robust policies, procedures and training are in place to ensure residents are protected and safe. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: A comprehensive complaints procedure is available and accessible to the staff team. A version that better suits the needs of the residents has been recently adapted. Staff spoken with said that they encourage the residents to raise any concerns they may have regarding any aspects of the service. Completed surveys from five staff show that they know what to do if a complaint is received. Surveys from relatives show that they “know how to complain”. There have been no recorded complaints since the last inspection was carried out in November 2008. The home has adequate policies concerning adult protection and whistle blowing. All staff have received training on adult protection; the staff spoken with were aware of the procedures for reporting any allegations of abuse. There were no adult protection matters pending at the time of the inspection; there have not been any staff members referred to the POVA and POCA Registers. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 24, 25 and 30 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The building was clean and generally well maintained, although restrictors must be fitted to the first floor bedroom windows to ensure the residents’ safety. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The building is spacious and airy, with single bedrooms; the communal lounge/diner is fairly spacious. All bedrooms were viewed and are thoroughly personalised to reflect the tastes and interests of the occupants. Furniture and fittings are of a domestic type and of good quality. It is positive that many of the people accommodated have had an input in changing the environment they live in, including individual bedroom decoration and communal areas. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 A high standard of cleanliness was evident throughout those areas viewed. There were no mal-odours present. The laundry facility is suitable and adequate for the residents accommodated. There are infection control policies and procedures in place. The arrangements for the storage and collection of domestic and clinical waste remain satisfactory. A number of first floor bedroom windows require a restrictor device; this would ensure the safety of the occupants and security of the building. There were no other health hazards noted. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 32, 34, 35 and 36 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Robust recruitment procedure is in place, although minor improvements are required for the protection of residents. Staffing levels ensure that residents’ needs are met satisfactorily. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The staff rota was seen and staffing levels within the home remain adequate, although there are a number of vacancies. A recruitment drive is in progress to fill the vacancies. Bank and occasionally agency staff are employed to ensure there are adequate numbers on each shift. The manager reported that the same agency staff members are used to ensure consistency and continuity of service. Information from completed surveys from five members and two staff spoken with indicates that there is enough staff on duty to meet the needs of the residents. Referring to vacancies and occasional dependency on agency staff, one relative said “The service users in Redgate need stability and too many changes are not always the best thing”. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 We looked at the personnel files for two staff recently appointed. These show that appropriate checks had been undertaken before they began employment. However, a recent photograph of the employee was not available in both cases. Staff complete induction training that covers mandatory health and safety training; it also provides an introduction to residents’ identified needs. This is then followed up with training over a period of about 6 months, which is specific to the needs of the people accommodated. Training records show that staff have received the training required for them to safely care for the people. The manager is trying to access specific training on Autism for all staff. Staff members have adequate experience and skills to enable them deliver a good service to the residents. All staff receive supervision every 4-6 weeks in which they have the opportunity to raise any issues about practice. Staff are supported by the management team on shift through mentoring and coaching. Staff who spoke with us said they are satisfied with the amount and quality of supervision they get and that they get good management support. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Standards 37, 39 and 42. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The home is well managed and the residents, safeguarded. The welfare and interests of the people accommodated are considered paramount. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The management of this home has continued to improve. This has been due to the effort, hard work and commitment of the registered manager and the staff team. The staff members are working well as a team, and morale is good. The manager works closely with the residents and staff team. Staff also said that the manager was supportive, approachable and committed. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Monthly visits by a designated person to ensure good standards are being maintained have been carried out; reports of the visits were available at the home. An annual quality assurance survey, in the form of a written questionnaire to residents and their relatives/representatives, is sent out from the head office. They are asked for their views and experience, and the results are collated into a report. We looked at some of the records the home is required to keep; these were found to be order. Health and safety matters are being attended to. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.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 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 Standard No Score 1 x 2 2 3 x 4 3 5 x INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 2 25 3 26 x 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 x 32 3 33 x 34 2 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 x 3 x LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 x 12 3 13 3 14 x 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 x 3 x 3 x x 3 x Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 No 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 YA24 Regulation 13 (4) Requirement The first floor bedroom windows must be fitted with a restrictor device so that residents are protected from possible harm A recent photograph must be available for all employees to ensure that residents are protected. Timescale for action 15/12/07 2 YA34 19 (1) (b) 10/12/07 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 YA2 Good Practice Recommendations The registered manager should be included in the initial stage of the pre-admission assessment rather than in the middle of the process. Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Cambridgeshire Area Team CPC1 Capital Park Fulbourn Cambridge CB21 5XE National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 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 Redgate Court (38) DS0000015130.V353397.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!