Inspection on 27/02/07 for Robert House

This inspection was carried out on 27th February 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

Robert House 09/12/08

Robert House 30/11/05

Robert House 07/07/05

Robert House 15/11/04

Robert House 25/05/04

Robert House 03/03/04

Robert House 18/03/03

Similar services:

Hillview Farm

Dalewood Respite Care

Orchard,The

REACH Upton Court Road

Fairways

Treloar College

Pinta

Kestrel House, St Anne`s Opportunity Centre,

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Robert House Robert House Avon Tyrell Bransgore Christchurch Dorset BH23 8EE Lead Inspector Keith Hopkins Unannounced Inspection 27th February 2007 2:00pm Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.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 Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.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. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Robert House Address 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) Robert House Avon Tyrell Bransgore Christchurch Dorset BH23 8EE 01425 673297 The Fortune Centre of Riding Therapy Miss Jane Pritchard-Williams Care Home 7 Category(ies) of Learning disability (7), Mental disorder, registration, with number excluding learning disability or dementia (7) of places Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Service users in the category LD and MD may be accommodated from the age of 16 years. 30th November 2005 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Robert House is one of three student residential units managed by The Fortune Centre of Riding Therapy, a Specialist College offering young adults who have a learning difficulty a 3 year further education course through the media of care and management of horses. This is then transferred to personal development towards independent living. The unit accommodates up to 7 second and third year students in single bedrooms with en-suite facilities. Robert Houses philosophy is to provide an environment for students to develop further daily living/independent living skills. During the working day, students are provided with educational activities on the college’s campus. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. Four hours were spent visiting the college, during which time the opportunity was taken to look around the building, view records and policies and to talk to the manager and other members of staff. The inspector was also able to speak with a group of six students during a break in their afternoon activities, two of these students being resident at Robert House and four from the organisation’s other registered premises. Later in the day the inspector spoke individually with two students in Robert House. What the service does well: 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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 Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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): 2. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The college has assessed the needs of its current students well. These needs are clearly recorded and known to staff. EVIDENCE: Three students’ files, relating to second and third year students, were inspected and needs assessments seen within these. Files contained a good level of detail to enable staff to meet assessed needs. There was, for example, information regarding communication, personal care, and students’ abilities in respect of reading, writing and dealing with personal financial matters. There was also information regarding medical needs together with a full medical history. Risk assessments were in evidence, including, for example, those relating to independent travel. It was explained to the inspector that students at Robert House were variously second or third year students whom it was felt would particularly benefit from living together as a small group. The inspector also saw evidence that assessments were reviewed on a regular basis, and that students are fully involved in this process. The manager and Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 members of staff spoken with were clearly well aware of the contents of the assessments. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The college has a good learning regime, which involves students and which addresses identified educational, personal, social and health care needs. EVIDENCE: Three Individual Learning Plans, developed from initial assessments were examined. These contained a good level of detail of continuing aspirations and goals, together with details of the support needed to meet these. Students are involved in planning personal goals, the college operating a key worker system to support this process. The inspector noted that records are kept on a daily basis detailing progress made towards meeting these goals, which are reviewed on a regular basis. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Students meet individually more formally with their key worker on a weekly basis and there are also weekly house meetings. The inspector examined minutes of more recent meetings and noted the actions recorded and taken to address issues raised. Students spoken with confirmed their involvement with the student council, which meets four times a term. The inspector noted a number of instances where matters raised by the council had been addressed by the Centre. Risk assessments are in place covering areas of identified risk for students and are subject to regular review. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Students enjoy varied lifestyles and have opportunities for personal development both within the college and the local community. Students enjoy a varied and healthy diet. EVIDENCE: The Fortune Centre of Riding Therapy’s philosophy is education through the media of care and management of horses. This is then transferred to personal development towards independent living. During the day students follow a group timetable developing a range of life skills and in the evenings are supported in other activities of both an educational and social nature. One student confirmed that students ‘learn to live independently’, and another said that she was shortly to attend for a job interview. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Activities undertaken include, for example, ten pin bowling, swimming and going to a gym. Two students confirmed that they had recently organised a trip to the cinema and a meal out. The inspector was informed that Sundays were not structured in the same way as weekdays but that students were able to plan their own timetable of activity. The college has a national catchment area, which means that most family contact occurs at half or end of term time. Parents are nevertheless welcome to visit and expected to do so on certain occasions. Although the inspector did not on this visit see a meal being served, the college’s menus were seen and were varied. Discussion with staff confirmed that individual and collective likes and dislikes were taken into account. Students are involved in menu planning as part of their social skills training. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 and 20. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The college provides a good level of personal support to students ensuring that personal, health care and medication needs are met. EVIDENCE: Staff were observed to be supporting students in undertaking day-to-day activities in a friendly and professional manner, and personal support is provided in a sensitive manner. The college employs a nurse manager to oversee students’ health care needs, and students are encouraged to manage these themselves whenever possible. All students register with a local GP on starting at college and access other local health care facilities such as the dentist and optician when necessary. There was evidence of access to other professionals such as a speech therapist, and health care notes kept at the college contained a good level of detail. There was, for example, in one record seen, clear information regarding one student’s allergies. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 The college has a policy and procedure for staff to follow regarding the dispensing of medication. There is a monitored dosage system in place and medication was securely stored in a locked cupboard within a locked room. All three students in Robert House taking medication are able to deal with their own needs, following risk assessment, and have been provided with a lockable facility in their rooms for the storage of medicines. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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): 22 and 23. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Students are well protected through procedures for dealing with complaints and suspected abuse, which are known to staff. EVIDENCE: The college has a complaints policy and procedure, and there are clear references to these in the handbook for students, parents and guardians. It had been previously reported to the inspector that the college had had no formal complaints to deal with for several years. Students spoken with were aware of how and to whom to report concerns, and appeared to have a good degree of confidence to do so if they needed to. The Commission has not received any complaints about the college. The college has two sets of protection procedures in place, one for children and young people and the other for adults. Staff have attended Protection Awareness workshops and those spoken with were conversant with both sets of procedures. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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): 24 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The college provides a safe and comfortable environment, which is suitably furnished, adequately maintained and meets students’ needs. EVIDENCE: The tour of the building showed this to be clean and tidy throughout and there were no undue odours. Communal areas were acceptably furnished and decorated and well maintained. There are adequate bathroom and toilet facilities. The inspector was able to view a small number of bedrooms, which were all adequate in size, and had clearly been personalised. Students were observed, on their return to the building later in the day, to be freely making use of communal areas and accessing their bedrooms as they wished. Students commented, variously, that they ‘like living here’, that ‘its ok here’ that we ’do our own shopping‘ and that we ‘have jobs around the house’. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The college’s laundry arrangements are such that students are expected to deal with their own laundry following a set procedure. Laundry facilities are sited so that soiled items, clothing and infected linen are not carried through areas where food is stored, prepared, cooked, or eaten. The college has a Health and Safety policy and staff spoken with were clearly aware of Health and Safety issues. A Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) file contained details of various chemicals in use at the college. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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): 32, 34 and 35. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Students are well supported by a well-trained staff team who are deployed in sufficient numbers to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: The Fortune Centre of Riding Therapy employs staff from various professional disciplines, such as teaching, physiotherapy, care, and occupational therapy as well as equestrian instructors. The inspector examined three staff files. All three files contained evidence of Criminal Records Bureau checks having been carried out, together with evidence of a sound and comprehensive recruitment process. New staff undergo a thorough induction programme accredited by the British Institute for Learning Disability. The inspector was able to examine the college’s training record. This confirmed details of courses undertaken by staff. Courses included Managing Challenging Behaviour, Adult Protection, Autism, Health and Safety, First Aid and Student Health. The organisation’s corporate training programme continues to provide Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 the opportunity for identified training needs to be met, and staff spoken with confirmed this. During the visit the inspector observed staff interacting with and supporting students in a friendly yet professional manner. Observation, discussion with staff and students, and examination of various records indicate that Robert House has an effective staff team with complementary skills who are employed in sufficient numbers to meet students’ needs. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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): 37, 39 and 42. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The college is well run by a competent manager. Students influence the college’s development and their interests are safeguarded by comprehensive policies and procedures. EVIDENCE: The registered manager has had several years experience working within the college and has a number of formal qualifications including a BA Honours degree. She is also an assessor for National Vocational Qualification Level 3 in Care. Students are consulted through a regular weekly house meeting and also have the ability to comment on the services during their weekly meeting with their Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 tutor. From observation and discussion with students and staff it was evident that good working relationships existed. External audit and quality assurance systems are in place. The college has a policy for the control of substances hazardous to health, and a health and safety policy known to staff. The inspector did not observe any immediate hazards to the health and safety of service users during the tour of the building. A sample of policies, procedures and records required by regulation were inspected and were in order and up to date. This included the college’s fire and accident books. Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 3 3 X 4 X 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 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 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 4 13 4 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 X PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection Hampshire Office 4th Floor Overline House Blechynden Terrace Southampton SO15 1GW 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 Robert House DS0000012459.V329037.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 - 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!