Inspection on 27/07/05 for Ridgewood House

This inspection was carried out on 27th July 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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Ridgewood House 11/07/07

Ridgewood House 24/05/06

Ridgewood House 16/01/06

Ridgewood House 05/01/05

Ridgewood House 02/06/04

Similar services:

Byars Care Home

St Marys Nursing Home

Bramble Lodge

Parkmanor Residential Home

Thornham Grove

Hunter`s Lodge

London Road Neurological and Specialist Care Unit

Carlton Care Home

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Ridgewood House 13 Dukes Drive Newbold Chesterfield, Derbyshire S41 8QB Lead Inspector Jill Wells Unannounced 27th July 2005 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 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. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Ridgewood House Address 13 Dukes Drive Newbold Chesterfield Derbyshire S41 8QB 01246 237333 01246 220205 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) Peter Walsh Lorraine Cocking Care Home 21 Category(ies) of OP - Older People registration, with number of places Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 5 January 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Ridgewood house is a detached building located in a busy residential area on the outskirts of Chesterfield town centre. The home is registered for 21 residents aged 65 and over. There are local amenities and bus routes nearby. Accommodation is provided on two floors, and a chairlift is used for residents unable to use the stairs. There are 14 single rooms, two of which have en suite toilet facilities. There are also three double rooms. The home has three adjacent lounge areas on the ground floor and a separate dining area. There are communal toilets close to the lounge and dining areas. There is one bathroom on the ground floor fitted with aids and adaptations. There is also a bathroom and a shower room on the first floor. There is a resident call systems fitted throughout the home. There is a small garden/sitting area at the rear of the home as well as benches provided at the front of the home. The home has a no smoking policy. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection took place over a 4.5 hour period. Residents were spoken to on a one-to-one basis as well as in groups. Time was spent with the manager and three proprietor of the home, and members of staff were interviewed. Three residents files were inspected as part of the case tracking method used. Preinspection information received from the manager has been included in the report. What the service does well: The home is well run by a respected manager and proprietor. There was clear evidence of knowledgeable, committed and dedicated staff team that worked well together. Staff and managers were very aware of individual residents needs. There was a great deal of care and sensitivity observed during the inspection as well as kindness and patience shown to residents. The environment is comfortable and homely. Residents spoken to were very happy living at the home. There were clear service user plans that stated what care tasks were to be undertaken in order to meet residents needs. Meals provided were praised by residents that were spoken to. Bedrooms were personalised and well decorated. The proprietor/registered provider visited almost on a daily basis. Residents and staff felt that both the manager and the proprietor were approachable and they could discuss any ideas, suggestions or concerns that they may have with them. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 standard(s) 1,2,3,5 The home provided clear information for prospective service users and their family/representatives to assist them in deciding if they wished to stay. EVIDENCE: There was a file available for prospective service users and their families that gave very detailed information about the home including the homes philosophy of care, and aims and objectives. There were several areas in this file that had not had the details change from the National Care Standards Commission to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The outside the home displaying the name of the home stated that the home was registered with Derbyshire County Council. This is no longer the case as it is now registered with CSCI. The CSCI inspection report was on display and residents and visitors were encouraged to read the report. Service users had a written contract/statement of terms and conditions with the home as well as a contract from Social Services where relevant. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 9 Service users admitted to the home with the support of social services had an assessment completed by a social worker/care manager. The manager had recently developed an assessment document for any service users that were self funding. Prospective service users as well as their families/representatives were encouraged to visit the home before they make a decision to stay. The manager will gather all relevant information concerning a prospective service user before deciding whether the home can meet their needs. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 standard(s) 7,8,9,10 Residents health and personal care needs were met by staff at the home and by other relevant health professionals as required. EVIDENCE: There was a clear and detailed service user plan in each of the three files that were inspected. These were drawn up with the involvement of the resident and relatives where appropriate. The service user plan set out in detail the action which needed to be taken by care staff to ensure that residents needs were met on an individualised basis. The plan was reviewed and any changes were recorded. Record showed that residents had access to health care services including GPs, chiropodist, opticians, dental services as well as community district nursing service. There was evidence that issues were dealt with promptly for example a new service user had broken glasses and the manager had ensured that an optician visited and new glasses had been ordered. All residents were assessed to identify their risk of developing pressure sores. Any residents that were at risk received district nursing intervention as well as appropriate equipment for the promotion of tissue viability. Residents spoken to said that they could see a doctor when ever they requested to. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 Residents weight was monitored and action taken if there had been any concerns regarding weight gain or loss. There were records kept of medicines received and administered. Medicines were kept securely. However there was not a lockable fridge specifically for the purpose of storing medication that required refrigeration. The record was maintained of current medication for each service user. The manager ensured that individual residents medication was reviewed regularly by their GP. Medication administration records were handwritten by the manager. However the manager had not signed these records and had not always stated the dose to be prescribed. Medication records were not stored securely. There was not a controlled drugs cabinet at the home, although there were not controlled drugs in use at the time of the inspection. Information and advice was sought from a pharmacist when required. The home had a drug reference book but this was eight years old and required updating. It was stated that medication training was provided by the manager, however accredited medication training from an external source was not provided. Residents spoken to said that staff were very sensitive when providing personal care and respected their privacy and dignity. One resident said that staff were always very kind and caring and the resident felt, safe when staff were helping me. Residents had consultation and examination by health professionals in their bedrooms. They could have visitors in their bedrooms or in the communal lounge areas. There was a public telephone in the hall area, although the manager stated that residents would often use the office telephone, especially if they needed to make a private call. It was obvious from observations between staff and residents that staff had a very caring attitude toward residents. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12,13,14,15 Activities provided at the home encouraged residents to be stimulated and sociable. Visitors were welcomed, and residents were encouraged to have choice and control over their own lives. EVIDENCE: There was an activities co-ordinator that worked that the home for an average of 26 hours per week. The activities record was not available on the day of the inspection, however residents and staff told the inspector that a variety of activities were organised. This included bingo, clothes and hosiery parties, dominoes, cards, singalongs, the beauty day that included the hairdresser and manicure. There were also outings to the local pub and a recent outing to Matlock. One resident was very keen to tell the inspector how much they enjoyed a recent visit to the pub for a meal and drinks. The service does not have their own transport however one member of staff has a 7 seater vehicle and will take six residents out with additional staff following in cars. There were several examples of key workers taking residents out on a one-to-one basis in their own time which was clear evidence of dedication and commitment to the residents. Families and friends were welcome to visit the home at any reasonable time. It was evident from observation that visitors felt comfortable at the home. The homes philosophy was that residents should have choice and control over their lives wherever possible. Staff encouraged residents to be as independent Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 as they were able. There was information concerning advocacy services for any residents or families that wish to contact them. Residents were encouraged to bring personal possessions with them and personalise their rooms. There was a two-week menu, and the days menu was displayed in the lounge area. Residents spoken to said that, food is good here. Residents particularly enjoyed the hand-picked strawberries recently provided. There were regular residents meetings and the minutes of these meetings showed that residents had an opportunity to voice any ideas or concerns that they may have. The cook was now recording any alternatives provided for individual residents. One resident did not enjoy a cooked lunch, and therefore was usually provided with sandwiches. The menu for breakfast stated that a choice of cereal or a cooked breakfast was available as well as toast and fruit juice. However the cook stated that there were presently no residents that enjoyed a cooked breakfast. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 There was a robust complaints procedure and an open culture that encouraged residents to voice any concerns that there may have. EVIDENCE: There was a written complaints procedure at the home that was available for residents and visitors. There was a recording system for any complaints made. There had been no complaints made since the last inspection. The manager and staff encourage residents and visitors to voice any concerns at an early stage in order to resolve issues quickly. Constructive suggestions were welcomed by the manager. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19,20,21,22,23,24 The environment was safe, clean, generally well maintained and met residents needs. EVIDENCE: The premises were safe and generally well maintained. The home was clean with no offensive odours. There was a maintenance program in place and the proprietor was quick to respond to any maintenance and decorating issues. Since the last inspection there had been several bedrooms and bathroom that had been decorated. Although the main bathroom on the ground floor had recently been decorated, the inside of the door required further redecoration as the bath hoist used had damaged the paintwork. Also the bath panel had been damaged by the plumber that had recently fitted thermostatic valves. As a result of a visit from the environmental health officer in January 2005 the proprietor has totally refurbished the kitchen area. Residents spoken to were very pleased with the general quality of the home and felt that the lounge and dining room areas were comfortable. The dining room was small, however there was adequate seating for all residents. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 16 The three lounge areas were well set out and allowed for a homely atmosphere. The home had a no smoking policy therefore there was no smoking area within the home. Several new loungechairs had recently been purchased after a review of the furniture was undertaken. Information received from the manager stated that all relevant servicing and checks had been undertaken as required. There were two bathrooms and a shower room, however the bathroom on the ground floor was mainly used. It was stated that residents preferred a bath with a static hoist. The taps on the bath on the first floor were checked and found to be leaking. There were suitable aids and adaptations in place to assist residents with mobility difficulties and handrails and grab rails fitted appropriately. However the handrails on the ground floor that were plastic were damaged in places and twisted around which may not be safe for residents. There was a portable hoist available. At the time of the inspection one resident required use of this hoist. There were 14 single rooms and three shared rooms. Two single rooms have en suite facilities. Residents had lockable drawers in their rooms. Doors could be locked from the inside and staff could override this if necessary. No residents had requested an individual key for their room, although consultation concerning this was not documented for all residents. Thermostatic control valves were in place on taps to ensure that water came from taps at the appropriate temperature. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27,28,30 Staff working at the home were competent as well as committed and dedicated to their job. EVIDENCE: Staffing rotas were maintained and staffing numbers were satisfactory and commensurate with the needs of the current resident group. Information received from the managers was that there were 18 residents with high needs. There was a high number of residents (11) that have dementia. It was stated and rotas confirmed that there were always three care staff on duty in the day, and two waking night staff. Staff spoken to said that they felt that they had adequate time to undertake all the jobs expected of them as well as additional time to spend talking to residents on a one-to-one basis. There were two cooks working at the home which ensured that there was a cook on duty over every lunchtime period. The cook would prepare the teatime meal for care staff to serve to residents. There had been no staff changes for over two years. Most staff had worked at the home for a significant time and it was evident from discussions with staff and observations that staff enjoyed working at the home and worked well as a team. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 There were eight senior care staff who were responsible for administering medication. The manager worked on average one care shift per week. This was good practice and was appreciated by care staff at the home. There were 15 out of 18 staff that had undertaken NVQ 2 Care or above. This was above the required standard and should be commended. Six of the eight senior staff had undertaken NVQ 3 Care. Recruitment and induction was not inspected on this occasion due to no new staff starting at the home. Mandatory training was available for staff and staff had also attended other specialist training. As there was a high number of residents with dementia care staff may benefit from undertaking dementia care training, although this was briefly covered within NVQ 2. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 19 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31, 32, 33, 36 and 38 The home is well run and managed, and the management team create an open and friendly environment. EVIDENCE: The registered manager had worked at the home for a number of years and was clearly a competent and committed manager. The proprietor/registered provider was very involved with the home and visited most days. Residents and staff said that they could approach the owner and manager and discuss any issues. It was evident from observation and discussion that the manager and proprietor worked well together. The management approach of the home created an open, positive and inclusive atmosphere. Staff spoken to said that they could laugh and joke when appropriate but knew that the manager would be suitably firm when required. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 The manager had undertaken NVQ 4 Care/management. Residents and their families/representatives were given an annual questionnaire to complete regarding the service. However this completed questionnaire, after being seen by the manager was returned to be families. This did not allow for an analysis of the results and the results to be available to interested parties. Feedback was actively sought from residents on an ongoing basis as well as a residents meetings. Policies and procedures were regularly reviewed by the registered provider. The manager provided one-to-one supervision to staff on a six monthly basis. It was stated that this had previously been more regular, however staff had requested that 6 months was adequate. There was an annual staff meeting with minutes taken. There were also regular senior care meetings to discuss all aspects of practice and issues concerning individual residents. The supervision included a training needs analysis and a self evaluation which was good practice. Safe working practices took place around moving and handling and staff were confident in this area. Fire safety training took place on a six monthly basis. All staff had first aid training. There was safe storage and disposal of hazardous substances. Steradent was in use by most service users, many of which were confused. Due to a recent alert concerning the use of steradent it was advised that the manager undertake a risk assessment and ensure that risks are minimised when steradent is in use. All radiators were covered. Some but not all windows on the first floor had a window restrictor in place for residents safety. Residents regularly visited or sat near to the pond. A written risk assessment was not in place to identify and minimise any potential risks. The premises were secure. There was an alarm device on the main door to alert staff of any residents leaving the home. Accidents were recorded and reported as required. Information received stated that the central heating system and emergency lighting had recently been checked. There was an electrical wiring certificate in place. The emergency call system was checked on an annual basis. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 3 3 x 3 x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 2 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 3 3 3 3 2 x x STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 x 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x x 3 3 2 x x 3 x 2 Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 22 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 1 Regulation 4 and 5 Requirement All documents must be reviewed to ensure that they have the name change from the National Care Standards Commission to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. There must be a lockable refrigerator for the purpose of storing medication. all handwritten information on the medication administration records must be signed and checked and signed by a second person. Dosage of medication must always be recorded. Medication records must be stored securely. There must be an up to date drug reference book. This should be the British National formulary (BNF) Medication training for staff administering medication must be provided by an external creditable source. The downstairs bathroom door must be re painted. The damaged bath panel on the ground floor must be repaired or replaced. Timescale for action 30 September 2005 2. 3. 10 10 13(2) 13(2) 30th October 2005 30 August 2005 4. 10 13(2) 30 September 2005 30 November 2005 30 September 2005 30 September 2005 Page 23 5. 10 13 (10) 6. 7. 19 19 23(2)(d) 23(2)(b) Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 8. 9. 10. 11. 19 19 38 24 23(2)(b) 23(2)(b) 13(4) 12(4)(a) The leaking tap on the first floor bath must be repaired. The handrails in corridors that are damaged and are not stable must be replaced. Window restrictors must be in place on all first floor windows. Records must be kept of individual consultation with residents regarding having their own bedroom door key. Appropriate risk assessments must be made if this is felt not appropriate. There must be a written risk assessments that considers the possible risks to service users when they are outside near the pond. The risk assessment must identify what action will be taken to minimise any risks identified. There must be written risk assessment that considers the possible risks to any service users that are confused and have access to steradent. The risk assessment must identify what action will be taken to minimise any risks identified. A copy of the completed service user/family questionnaires must be kept at the home. The results must be analysed, and a record made of any action taken as a result of information received. The results of the surveys should be made available to residents, families and any other interested parties 30 September 2005 30th October 2005 30 September 2005 30 October 2005 12. 38 13(4) 30 September 2005 13. 38 13(4) 30 September 2005 14. 33 24 30 December 2005 Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 24 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. 2. Refer to Standard 1 30 Good Practice Recommendations Consideration should be given to amending the outside sign which states that the home is registered with Derbyshire County Council. An appropriate training course for care staff concerning working with service users with dementia should be accessed. Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection South Point Cardinal Square Nottingham Road, Derby DE1 3QT 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 Ridgewood House C02 C52 S20084 Ridgewood House V241526 270705 stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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!