Inspection on 06/11/07 for Riverside Residential Home

This inspection was carried out on 6th November 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 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

Riverside Residential Home 30/11/06

Riverside Residential Home 22/11/05

Similar services:

Snydale Care Home

Abbey The

Larchfield Manor

Hawkhills

Beeches The - North Yorkshire County Council

The Grove Waltham

Carentan House

Ravensworth Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Riverside Residential Home Camborne Way Monk Bretton Barnsley South Yorkshire S71 2NR Lead Inspector Mrs Jayne White Key Unannounced Inspection 6th November 2007 09:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Riverside Residential Home Address Camborne Way Monk Bretton Barnsley South Yorkshire S71 2NR 01226 296416 F/P 01226 296416 none 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) Park Lane Healthcare (Riverside) Limited Mrs Jaqueline Steeples Care Home 40 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (40) of places Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The Manager works full-time supernumerary (37 hours) over and above the hours provided for care. 30th November 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Riverside is a care home providing personal care and accommodation for 40 older people. The home is situated at the head of a cul-de-sac on Camborne Way, Monk Bretton, on the edge of an estate of modern houses and bungalows. Shops and other amenities, including a main bus route are close to the home. Accommodation is on one level and provides single and double bedrooms. The home stands in its own grounds and has lawned areas. There is a car park to the front. Information about the home, including the service user guide is available in the entrance hall. This includes the most current Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) report about the service. The manager said the range of fees were £341.50 - £347.50. Additional charges are made for newspapers/magazines, hairdressing, dry cleaning, telephone calls and chiropody. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. I visited the home without giving them any notice between 9:00 and 17:45. Before the visit I took into consideration other information I had received. This included an Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA). An AQAA is a document completed by providers. It gives them the opportunity to tell the CSCI how well they think they are meeting the needs of people using their service. Surveys were also sent to a range of people, asking them about the home. Four came back from people that lived there, one from a representative of a person that lived there, two from staff and one from a health care professional. An ‘expert by experience’, Heather Hudson also assisted with the visit. An ‘expert by experience’ is a person who, because of their experiences of using services visits a service with an inspector. This helps the inspector get a picture of what it is like to live in the service. Heathers main focus was talking to people about how they felt their privacy and dignity was respected and what their daily routines and meals were like. She also observed how staff spoke with people and cared for them. In addition, I also spoke with staff and the manager, inspected parts of the building and read some records. Both Heather and I would like to thank the people, staff and manager for their time and co-operation throughout the inspection process. What the service does well: People living at the home and staff continued to benefit from the management approach. Comments by people and their representatives about the manager included, “she runs a tight ship” and about staff they said, “they’re gems” and “lovely”. The staff team said, “they’re (management) very insistent that any new information and needs of residents are carried out thoroughly” and “the service makes sure that every individual person’s needs are met and standards don’t slip”. People’s admission into the home was well managed and they said they received enough information about the home. On the whole, the health and personal care that people received reflected what assistance they needed and this was documented in their plan of care. People Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 were treated with respect and dignity. Representatives praised the service saying, “they give excellent care, physical, psychological and social care. They encourage residents to socialize and there is always activities going on during the afternoon and most evenings” and “continue to be impressed by the standard of care, the cleanliness and very pleasant surroundings and environment”. During the visit we saw people following their preferred routine. A good range of activities both within and outside the home were provided for people if they wanted to participate. We saw daily activities taking place and the programme for the week was displayed in the entrance so people could see if they wanted to join in. Mealtimes were relaxed and leisurely. We saw people being able to make choices about what they ate, which supported the person’s health and wellbeing. There was a complaints procedure that people had access to and on the whole felt confident using. People were protected from abuse and had their rights protected. When we spoke with people they said, “no complaints”, “couldn’t complain about anything” and “you can’t knock it”. A phrase used by a representative captured a picture of the environment when they commented, “there is never an unpleasant odour as in a lot of other homes I have visited. It really is like a home away from home”. A thorough recruitment procedure was undertaken, which supported the protection of people. A good training and development programme was in place that provided opportunities for staff to keep up to date with practice and changing legislation. Effective quality assurance systems were in place that the manager used to improve the service. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Although people’s admission into the home was well managed, the statement of purpose and service user guide needed updating and the admission assessment could contain more detail. When people are admitted to the home a nutritional risk assessment should be completed. This would confirm whether intervention was needed and demonstrate that people are receiving an appropriate diet and help where required with meals and drinks. To write impartially in the complaints record. This would demonstrate factually how a complaint has been investigated, the outcome and if any action has been taken as a result of the complaint. 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. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 1 and 3 were inspected. The home did not provide an intermediate care service. People who use the service experience adequate quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People received information they needed to choose a home, but this needs updating. People had their needs assessed before they moved in, but should contain more detail. EVIDENCE: The statement of purpose and service users guide, which provides information about the home, was displayed in the entrance hall. The homes most recent inspection report was also displayed, but not within the service user guide. This should be included in the service users guide for the purpose of prospective people who may not necessarily visit the home prior to their admission. Copies were also available in the office should anyone request the information. Both documents contained a description of the services, but this Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 was out of date. The manager was aware of this, but was waiting until the extension and refurbishment had been completed before commencing work on the documents. All but one person, via the survey said that they had received enough information about the home before making a decision to move there. When we spoke to people they said “family had chosen the home, but they had chosen well” and “they’d moved from a previous home due to this home being on one level, the other one had stairs, and the lift wasn’t too reliable”. Talking to people confirmed they’d made choices in choosing the home. One said, “he and his daughter had decided on Riverside”. The manager or deputy visited prospective people to carry out their own assessment before they moved into the home. This enabled staff to put together a plan of care and confirm the service was appropriate to meet the person’s individual needs. I looked at two peoples’ files for the assessment that was undertaken. These did contain an assessment, but needed more detail. Information had been obtained from relevant professionals about the person’s assessed needs. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 were inspected. People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. On the whole, the health and personal care that people received reflected what assistance they needed and this was documented in their plan of care. People were treated with respect and dignity. EVIDENCE: I looked at two care plans. They contained good information and detailed peoples’ individual needs. There was sufficient detail on the plan for staff to be clear about the care to be provided. This enabled carers to have clear information about what they needed to do to meet a person’s health and personal care needs. The plans had been reviewed to ensure that staff continued to meet peoples’ needs. Daily records of the care that staff had provided to the person were maintained. They confirmed staff followed the plan for meeting the person’s health and personal care needs. Risk assessments were in place. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Nutritional screening for people was not demonstrated in the peoples’ files I looked at. The manager said this was because the people were new admissions. This meant some of the information required on the assessment could not be completed, as it was not known. I discussed with the manager about obtaining a different tool as an interim assessment for the people who had recently been admitted. This would enable the service to make sure and demonstrate they were meeting the person’s nutritional requirements. Information in the plan of care demonstrated that a range of healthcare professionals visited people. These included district nurses and community psychiatric nurse. During my visit I observed one person attending hospital with a member of staff. They said, “it was a routine appointment”. People, via the survey said that they always or usually received the care and medical support that they needed, as did their representatives. Comments by people and their representatives about the care they received included, “they give excellent care, physical, psychological and social care. They encourage residents to socialize and there is always activities going on during the afternoon and most evenings”, “I’m well looked after and they’re gems when you’re not well”, “always look after those that most need it first”, “can’t fault care given to my relatives”, “I can’t complain, the medical side is better than the one I was in before”, “we’re were very pleased with the way mum has been treated” and “continue to be impressed by the standard of care, the cleanliness and very pleasant surroundings and environment”. Surveys from staff and my discussions with them confirmed they were always given up to date information about the needs of the people they cared for. They said, “they’re very insistent that any new information and needs of residents are carried out thoroughly” and “the service makes sure that every individual person’s needs are met and standards don’t slip”. Heather and myself saw people being cared for in a manner that respected their privacy and dignity. There was clear and respectful communication between people and staff, for example, at mealtimes. People were immaculately dressed, their hair and nails were clean and no one had food spillage on their clothes. We noticed a few of the ladies were not wearing tights/stockings. Discussions with the manager confirmed this was their choice. It would be useful to include this information in the plan of care to confirm this. The AQAA that I received said people could give themselves their own medication if they were able or wanted to. A risk assessment was carried out to decide if this was possible. The AQAA also stated if people did look after their own medication they were provided with a lockable drawer so that it was stored safely. In addition, the AQAA stated staff responsible for medication were trained in the safe handling of medication. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 When I looked at staff files the training they had undertaken could be seen. Also, I spoke with one member of staff who described how their own training was being given and supervised by the deputy and manager. They said this was so they were familiar with the procedures for the receipt, storage, administration and disposal of medication. There was a separate locked room for storing medication and medication was securely stored. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for 12, 13, 14 and 15 were inspected. People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People were assisted to make choices, decisions about their daily life and social activities. EVIDENCE: The AQAA stated: • As a result of the services own survey people had highlighted they wanted more outings. It said these have increased this year and dependent on the funds that are raised will continue to do so. • The activities programme had improved to give a wider range of opportunities for people to join in. • The activities programme was 25 hours a week and that this was flexible to allow visitors to participate, including a bar night and sing a long and theme nights. Five people, via the surveys, said that there were always or usually activities available should they wish to join in. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 An activities coordinator was employed and activities took place on a daily basis. Activities included bingo, arts and crafts, bar nights, dominoes and trips out. Empowering people and maintaining peoples’ independence was also encouraged through the activities. One person was the ‘bingo caller’. Weekly activities were displayed in the entrance, so people knew what organised activity would take place each day and could choose whether or not to join in. I spoke with the activities coordinator who said they arranged activities generally around what people would like to do and all people got a bit of their time. Heather saw a group of ten people playing bingo. They were playing with large bingo cards with large numbers printed on them. This helped those people whose sight had deteriorated to join in the games. Prizes were given to the winners of each game. Other activities arranged were dominoes, arts and crafts and a bar night was held. Seasonal events were also arranged. This included trips to the seaside in the summer and a Christmas party in December, which will involve a Christmas lunch, followed by a singer. The people also took part in a bonus ball, linked to the lottery. The winner of this was displayed on the notice board in the hall. This was part of the banter between people and staff. When Heather spoke to people they described how they spent their day. One described how they had got involved with feeding the wild birds in the garden and took them bread out each morning. They said “the food is nice and the staff will do anything for you, it is a nice place and you can’t knock it.” They said they got quite a few visitors - mainly people they used to work with. They said staff just leave you to yourself, when they come to see you. We saw people spending their time in the lounges, alone in their own rooms and walking around the home and socialising as they wished. The AQAA stated: • There had been improvements around meal times as a result of their own survey with people. This had included a more varied menu at meal times and making the choices daily, not in advance. Also, making people aware that if they’re not happy with the choices they could request something else if the food was available. • The service provides a well-run kitchen, offering good choice, using high quality food. • There were two sittings, three meals a day and snacks and hot and cold drinks in between if people required. It said menus were changed to accommodate the different seasons. • The service had achieved a score of ‘5’ through BMBC Scores on Doors. Five people, via the survey, said that they always enjoyed the meals provided. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 A menu written on a blackboard outside the dining room gave menus for the day. This meant people knew what food was being served that day and made it possible them to make choices. At breakfast time there were cereals, fruit juice, toast and marmalade and also a hot option. The lunchtime menu was pork steak; mashed potato and the seasonal vegetables were cabbage and carrots. Individual preferences were catered for. Heather heard one member of staff order from the kitchen one plate without carrots and another without gravy. The pudding was chocolate sponge. Teatime was a chip butty or a selection of sandwiches and cake. Supper, the final meal of the day consisted of sandwiches, cakes and fruit malt. Heather saw apple and banana being served with the mid morning drink and that most of the people had the fruit as well as a drink. Meals were served at two sittings so there was enough staff available to serve people in a timely fashion and provide assistance for people that needed this. In my discussions with staff it was clear that the way people were assisted to eat was not carried out on an individual basis. This can compromise respect for their dignity and good practice guidelines identifies this is not good practice. I spoke with the manager about this. However, Heather did see people who required help with their meals being brought into the dining room about fifteen minutes before other people. This was so they could be helped by staff to eat their food. She felt this was done sympathetically and patiently. Heather saw the lunchtime meal being served. All of the meals looked extremely appetising and well presented. The dining room was very tidy with clean linen and paper serviettes on the table. Orange juice was in glasses for each person. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 16 and 18 were inspected. People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There was a complaints procedure that people had access to and on the whole felt confident using. People were protected from abuse and had their rights protected. EVIDENCE: The complaints procedure was included in the home’s statement of purpose and service users guide. I also saw it displayed in the entrance hall. This meant people had access to information about how to make a complaint and who would deal with it. Since the last inspection, no complaints have been to the CSCI. The manager maintained a record of complaints. One complaint had been made via social services. The written record was subjective and did not make it clear the complaint had been answered. This was because how the complaint had been investigated had not been recorded. Neither had the outcome of those investigations, nor if any action had been taken as a result of the investigation. To record information objectively was discussed with the manager. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Five people, via the survey, said that they knew how to make a complaint and who to talk to should they be unhappy about any aspect of their care. We spoke with people and they said they had no concerns or grumbles and commented, “no complaints”, “couldn’t complain about anything” and “you can’t knock it”. Staff surveys also confirmed they knew what procedures to follow if someone had concerns about the service. They clarified this by commenting, “I ask them to fill a complaint form in if they are unhappy about things and ask them to speak to the manager as I am unable to deal with that sort of thing”. When I spoke with staff they also said that was the procedure they would follow. The AQAA confirmed there were policies/procedures/codes of practice in place to protect people from abuse. It also stated staff were trained in abuse and encouraged to come forward if they were concerned. A staff training programme was in place for adult safeguarding training. Previous history of the service illustrates the manager deals with allegations of abuse immediately and takes appropriate action to protect people and staff. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 19 and 26 were inspected. People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Despite building work being carried out on the site, the environment was well maintained and clean, providing a comfortable home for people to live. EVIDENCE: The AQAA stated a full programme of redecorating and refurbishment was taking place. It stated the service was proud to present a home that was kept clean, hygienic and free from offensive odours. The AQAA stated the service felt the location and layout was suitable for people. It also stated routine maintenance programmes and cleaning schedules were in place. The owner was in the process of extending the home and building work was taking place. Despite this, the home was well maintained and tidy. It was clean and did not have any offensive smells. There were a number of lounges and a Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 large dining room, which gave people sufficient space. All amenities were on one level, which provided people with easy access to them and to the outdoors. Five people, via the survey said that the home was always clean and fresh. One representative said, “there is never an unpleasant odour as in a lot of other homes I have visited. It really is like a home away from home”. Heather said that when she first entered Riverside, it felt as if she was going into a private house. The place was bright and airy and very comfortable with pleasant décor and welcoming chairs in the hallway. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 27, 28, 29 and 30 were inspected. People who use the service experience excellent quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There was an experienced, trained and stable staff team that were in sufficient numbers to meet the needs of people living there. EVIDENCE: The AQAA stated that the service operated high staffing levels. I looked at three weeks rotas, which demonstrated that sufficient staff were provided to meet the general and specific needs of people. Five people, via the survey, said that there was always or usually staff available when they needed them. They also said staff always listened and acted on what they said. When we spoke with people they spoke highly of the manager and staff team describing them as “gems” and “lovely”. Heather described the staff as very cheerful and helpful to people. A good training and induction programme was in place. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Surveys from staff confirmed that when they started work their induction had covered everything that they needed to know to do the job. They said they always felt they had the right support, experience and knowledge to meet the different needs of people using the service. Their comments included, “I was shown round the building and worked alongside staff members until I got used to client’s needs”, “we are given training once a month on various courses needed to do with caring, to update our knowledge as things change” and “management are always there to help”. I spoke with staff that had recently commenced employment. They said they were receiving support and guidance appropriate to what they needed. This had included fire and safety procedures and working with an experienced member of staff until they were confident to work independently. I saw the training programme, which identified training for all staff took place on a regular basis. This included infection control, health and safety, dementia, life support, fire safety, moving and handling, food hygiene and safeguarding adults. The AQAA stated 62 of staff had obtained their NVQ Level 2 in Care, with 25 working towards it. The AQAA also stated the service operated good continuous training with staff following a training programme that was provided on a monthly basis. Additionally, it also stated all catering staff and 65 of care staff had received training in food handling. Fifteen staff had training in the control of infection. The AQAA stated there was a recruitment policy in place. I looked at three staff files, one of which was for a member of staff who had recently commenced employment. The files contained a range of information including two references and a declaration of health and identification. The staff had undertaken a criminal record bureau check (CRB), at the enhanced level. For the member of staff recently recruited it demonstrated that a Protection Of Vulnerable Adults check had been carried out before they commenced employment. This confirmed thorough recruitment practices were in place, which was sufficient to safeguard people. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The outcomes for standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 were inspected. People who use the service experience good quality outcomes in this area. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The management and administration of the home is based on openness and respect and has effective quality assurance systems developed by a competent manager. EVIDENCE: In the AQAA the manager stated she operates through an open and positive leadership, being firm but fair and tries her best to run the home in the best interests of people living there. Information we knew about the manager was she had many years experience within the caring profession. She had a good knowledge of the needs of people Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 and was committed to providing a good quality service. Her direction and leadership promoted a relaxed and friendly atmosphere. Our discussions with people and staff supported how the manager felt she lead the home. People felt the manager was approachable and one person commented, “she runs a tight ship”. The staff also spoke highly of the manager and the support that they received describing her as “firm but fair” and “approachable”. One representative said, “Jackie is an excellent manager”. The AQAA stated the service involved people, their families, friends and visitors to give views on their likes, dislikes, wants and needs by informal meetings, anonymous questionnaires and a suggestion box which are easily available. It stated they undertake an audit annually and make available the results and implementations that arise from it. Examples include – more varied menu at meal times, making the choice daily, not in advance. If people are not happy with the choices make sure they know they can request something else if the food is available. I looked at records that demonstrated there were quality assurance systems in place. This included consulting with people and their representatives, via a questionnaire, to give their opinion of the service that they received. Areas covered included were the activities available, quality of food and the attitude of the staff team. Information from the questionnaires had been collected and areas of improvement identified and implemented. The manager had not completed this years yet due to the ongoing building works. She had reviewed the questions on the questionnaire. Systems were in place for general maintenance including a general inspection of the environment, fire systems, food, activities, cleaning and servicing and maintenance of equipment. When I spoke with the manager said that she received good support from the owner and that they regularly visited the home. A record of the owner’s last visit was in place. The AQAA stated people were encouraged to look after their own money. It stated if they didn’t, procedures were in place to record any transactions. When I spoke with the manager she said a lockable drawer was provided so that it would be safe. Recently, the home’s safe had been stolen. A new one had not been purchased. As a result of this the service were not dealing with monies on behalf of people. The interim arrangement if people wanted money in an emergency was that petty cash was used. Where the home had paid for Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 services on behalf of people, for example, hairdressing, a bill was sent to them for the monies they owed. Dates for the majority of the servicing and maintenance of equipment had been confirmed in the AQAA. Where they hadn’t, I discussed this with the manager who provided information to confirm systems were in place. When I looked round the building fire exits had been kept free from obstruction. I also looked at accidents records to make sure that where necessary they were being reported to the CSCI. The purpose for this is so that judgements can be made about whether the service dealt with incidents appropriately. On the whole, they were being reported. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2 X 2 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 2 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 2 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 3 30 4 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 4 X 3 X 3 X 3 3 Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 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 OP1 Good Practice Recommendations The statement of purpose and service user guide should be updated so that people have up to date information about the home. The admission assessment should cover in detail all the assessment information identified in 3.3 of the National Minimum Standards. This would demonstrate the service had obtained enough information to formulate the plan of care. Complete a nutritional risk assessment when people are admitted, to demonstrate people are receiving an appropriate diet and help where required with meals and drinks. For staff to assist people to eat on an individual basis, so respect for their dignity is maintained. DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 2. OP3 3. OP7 4. OP15 Riverside Residential Home 5. OP16 The complaints record should objectively demonstrate factually how a complaint has been investigated, the outcome and if any action has been taken as a result of the complaint. This demonstrates how the complaint has been addressed to answer and provide evidence of the outcome. Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 29 Commission for Social Care Inspection Sheffield Area Office Ground Floor, Unit 3 Waterside Court Bold Street Sheffield S9 2LR 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 Riverside Residential Home DS0000064882.V349723.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 30 - 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!