Inspection on 12/02/08 for Rockrose

This inspection was carried out on 12th February 2008.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Adequate. 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

Rockrose 25/09/09

Rockrose 07/07/09

Rockrose 10/02/09

Rockrose 27/04/07

Rockrose 02/06/06

Rockrose 21/10/05

Rockrose 03/06/05

Rockrose 01/02/05

Rockrose 02/04/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

Old Hastings House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Rockrose 10 Kingsfield Road Herne Bay Kent CT6 7EA Lead Inspector Jenny McGookin Unannounced Inspection 9:50 12 February 2008 th 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 Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.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. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rockrose Address 10 Kingsfield Road Herne Bay Kent CT6 7EA 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) 01227 740549 Mr Sookdeo Sawock Miss Uyjayantimala Aubeeluck Miss Uyjayantimala Aubeeluck Care Home 7 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (7) of places Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 27th April 2007 Brief Description of the Service: Rockrose is a care home, registered to provide accommodation and personal care for 7 older people aged 65 years and over. Currently, 5 older people live in the home. It is owned and managed by Mr Sawock and Miss Aubeeluck, who live on the first floor of the premises. They have been the registered owners / managers of this home since 1998. This is a detached chalet-style property located in a quiet residential area of Broomfield. There is access to public transport close by, with local amenities being situated at a further distance. All the residents’ bedrooms are single occupancy, ground floor rooms, with en-suite facilities. The communal areas consist of a lounge and dining room/ sun lounge. There is an enclosed garden to the rear of the property. The current fees for the service at the time of the visit range from £308 (funding authority placements) to £350 (privately funded placements) per week. Additional charges are stated in the terms of accommodation. Information on the Home’s services and the CSCI reports for prospective service users will be detailed in the Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide. There is no e-mail address for this home. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection, which was intended to review findings on the last inspection (April 2007) in respect of the day-to day running of the home; and to check compliance with matters raised for attention on that occasion. The inspection process took just over six and a quarter hours, and involved meeting with both proprietors (one of whom is also the registered manager); one resident individually and two over lunch, and a member of staff. Feedback questionnaires were taken on the site visit for distribution to residents, their relatives, staff and professionals (social and healthcare) and will be used to inform the Commission’s intelligence. Account was also taken of the home’s own feedback exercise carried out among residents and relatives over the Christmas period. The inspection involved an inspection of every room and examination of maintenance documents. Two personnel files and five residents’ files were selected for closer examination. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Plans were being made to address matters raised by the last inspection. The home has admitted two residents since the last inspection, bringing it closer to full occupancy. It has also recruited two permanent part time staff, so residents will benefit by training investments being planned. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Quality in this outcome area is adequate This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 3, 5, 6 3. There is a systematic preadmission assessment format to ensure a consistent approach 5. The admission process includes an invitation to visit the premises, taste the food and stay for trial stays, so that prospective residents can judge whether this home can meet their needs. 6. This home does not provide intermediate care. EVIDENCE: The last inspection (April 2007) found that the home’s Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide were generally compliant with the elements of the National Minimum Standard, so these documents were not reassessed on this occasion. No other languages or formats are currently warranted. The owner Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 said that prospective residents and their representatives are shown copies of both documents, but the home is not recording whether copies are distributed. This is strongly recommended, given the poor recall of residents, when asked. Feedback on the day of this inspection confirmed findings from previous visits, specifically that the decision to apply to this home was influenced more by its locality (i.e. close to where the resident or relatives lived) - than by any public information produced by the home itself. The residents spoken to on this occasion said that their placement had been arranged by relatives, who had in each case visited a number of homes to make their choice. The home is not keeping a record of such visits. This is recommended, so that anyone authorised to inspect the record can judge how careful the admission process is. The residents in question clearly missed being able to continue living in their own homes but said they had been looked after well by this home. For residents who are admitted to the home through social services, a joint care management assessment is obtained. The proprietors also carry out their own summary assessment of each prospective resident. The placement contract confirms that there is a month’s trial stay, during which time the initial assessment is reviewed on a day-to day basis. A care plan is set up during the first month, following a meeting with the resident or their relatives. However, the home needs to be more robust about recording who participates in these initial meetings, so that anyone authorised to inspect the record can judge how inclusive they are. The care plan is in each case reviewed monthly thereon. This home does not provide intermediate care. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Quality in this outcome area is adequate This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 7, 8, 9, 10 7. Residents can be confident that their health and personal care needs will be addressed by the home’s assessment and care planning processes 8. Residents benefit by the home being served by a range of healthcare professionals as appropriate and from the adequate facilities for privacy. 9. Residents are protected by the home’s medication arrangements. 10. Residents can feel confident that they will be treated with respect and their right to privacy will be upheld. EVIDENCE: The format of the care plan, which follows on from the preadmission assessment is clearly designed to address the health and (to a much lesser extent) the social care needs of the residents. Although the format was revised to record the agreement of the residents or their relatives / Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 representatives, this element was more usually left blank in the five seen. When questioned about the care plans, two residents were only able to recognise the term “care plan”, once it was explained to them. But all three spoken to on this occasion were confident that staff knew what their care needs were. Since the last inspection the home has recruited two permanent part time staff, which should enhance the rapport staff have with residents even further. Two residents’ care plans did not contain a photograph of the residents and none of the photographs showed the identity of the resident or the date the photograph was taken. Both are recommended as a safeguard should records fall into disarray or a resident go missing so that others can rely on their currency. The home’s owner and manager undertook to make sure that all files contain an up to date photographs of the residents. The home has adopted a daily report format, which should enable anyone authorised to inspect the records to easily track trends in individuals’ personal and healthcare needs. But these records are not being summarised in any detail, and in each case there is only a very summary monthly review statement, which almost invariably showed no changes. There was still clearly an overwhelming physical care bias in care plan objectives (see section on “Daily Life and Social Activities”), and the records still do not show any attempts to pursue residents’ emotional needs (reliance is placed on friends and relatives to provide this) or to establish any unmet needs. These elements have been raised for attention at previous inspections and will require attention, to ensure a more holistic approach. The home has access to a range of healthcare professionals but dental services are reported to have been more problematical to arrange, though the owner said that some small progress has been made in respect of one or two residents. One other resident has refused to cooperate with dental services. Residents must be registered with a GP as a condition of their admission, and would have to fund any alternative therapies themselves. Each bedroom is single occupancy, so that examinations and treatments can be given in privacy. Each bedroom has an en-suite WC and hand-wash basin, so their privacy and availability is assured, but commodes are routinely used at night in case of falls. The communal bath has a shower attachment, so that residents have some choice, and it also has an integral hoist / bath seat. Feedback on this visit and from the home’s own feedback exercise over Christmas (residents and relatives) confirmed that residents felt well cared for. The home uses the Royal Pharmaceutical Society Guidance on the administration and storage of medication, and also has a directory of drugs for reference. But it needs to get a more updated edition of each, to ensure Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 compliance with best practice standards. The home uses the Monitored Dosage System (MDS) to keep people safe, and tidied up its medication cabinet after the last inspection, to ensure its stock is always current. An examination of medication administration records showed no apparent gaps or anomalies, though photographs for two residents (recommended practice, as a precaution against mistakes) had not yet been arranged. Training in medication has been booked for the manager for the end of February. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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): Quality in this outcome area is adequate This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 12, 13, 14, 15 12. Residents are generally content with their lifestyles in this home, and the home has been able to match their expectations. 13. Residents benefit by the home’s open visiting arrangements, and the home is reasonably well placed for access to local shopping outlets and transport links. 14. Residents benefit by exercising choice and control over most aspects of daily routines. 15. Residents benefit from having meals that are well prepared and presented, and mealtimes are unhurried. The setting is congenial. EVIDENCE: The findings from this inspection generally confirmed those of previous inspections. Residents confirmed that they can choose when to go to bed or get up, and what to do during the day, but tend in practice to have their own fairly set routines. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 This home has an open visiting policy. Each room has a telephone point, though the installation of private telephone lines would be at the residents’ own expense. There is also a cordless communal phone, which can be taken into the privacy of bedrooms. There is no charge for its use. The home organises a limited number of activities, and this matter was raised for further attention on this visit. Daily records indicate residents spend most days watching television or sitting in the conservatory, listening to music, reading or chatting. There are some games or quizzes and an entertainer had been booked for one day the week before this visit. The home organises outings but only very occasionally, and residents are sometimes taken out for walks by staff. The home is very reliant of friends and relatives for most outings. Religious preferences are properly identified as part of the initial assessment and care planning process, but only one resident currently attends church services off site (with his partner). Otherwise, it was clear that there has not been much interest from the residents. In terms of managing finances, the situation is as reported at previous inspections. The home does not manage anyone’s finances, and no monies are held on behalf of residents – an arrangement has been reached with family members that residents would have access to a small personal allowance. The home’s dining area was well decorated and maintained, and provided a congenial setting. Adapted cutlery and crockery are not currently warranted. The inspector joined the residents for lunch. The meal was generally well prepared and presented and the residents generally appeared to enjoy what they were presented with. Records are kept of all the menus, and the records show where alternatives are being provided for individuals. However, actual intake isn’t being recorded in any detail e.g. where residents leave significant elements of their meal untouched. And the inspector noted that where this was the case, no alternatives were offered. This is recommended, so that anyone authorised to inspect the records can judge whether individual needs are preferences are being met. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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): Quality in this outcome area is good This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 16, 18 16. Resident’s and relatives are confident that their complaints will be listened to and acted upon. 18. Residents are protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints procedure, which is detailed in its contract and referred to in its Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide. The last inspection reported that it had been updated to make it more clear and comprehensive. The owner reports that there have been no complaints registered over the past twelve months. Ordinarily this would not be regarded as a realistic reflection of communal living, but for the home’s own feedback exercise over Christmas. Residents and relatives all said that they knew who to talk to if they had any concerns, but in some cases they went on to say they had not had any cause to make a complaint. The home has a policy on adult protection, which usefully addressed the home’s philosophy and the legal position; types of abuse and possible indicators as well as monitoring and prevention measures and a checklist of action to take if abuse is suspected or evidence is found. The home also has a copy of the latest Kent and Medway protocol to ensure a timely and coordinated approach. The last inspection found that only one of the Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 homeowners has attended training in safeguarding adult protection. On this occasion, the owner provided evidence of training booked for one member of staff in April, but will need to ensure that all staff have a through understanding of safeguarding adults. The inspector met with one member of staff who confirmed her commitment to report any instances of abuse, should this ever apply, and knew who to turn to should the home’s management not respond appropriately. This is in keeping with the home’s policy on whistle blowing. All three residents spoken to on this visit confirmed feedback on previous inspections, that they felt safe at this home. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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): Quality in this outcome area is good This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26 19, 25. Residents benefit from living in a home which is judged suitable for its stated purpose and provides a safe environment. 20. Residents benefit from having a choice of communal areas, and furnishings tend to be domestic in character. There are homely touches throughout. 21. Residents have access to suitable and sufficient WC and bathing / washing facilities. 23, 24. The residents’ own rooms suit their needs, and they can have their own possessions around them. 26. Residents benefit from living in a home that is generally well maintained, clean and free of offensive odours. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 EVIDENCE: All areas of the home inspected were found to be homely, comfortable and clean. The furniture tends to be domestic in style and there were homely touches throughout. All the radiators have guards as a precaution against the risk of accident. All bedrooms, bathroom, WC and communal areas have accessible call bells. The rear garden area provides a pleasant and generally private area to walk or sit in. The home has a “No Smoking” policy, which is clearly stated in the contract. This home offers a choice of communal areas. There is a lounge and conservatory, with a ramp and handrail to the rear garden. Each area has a TV and either a radio or video so that residents have a choice, and there was a range of seating, to meet residents’ individual needs and preferences. There is also a dining area, with tables arranged to enable residents to sit as a group or alone. One dining room chair had arms for support. The home’s kitchen compared unfavourably with the rest of its facilities. This was last inspected by Canterbury City Council “Scores on the Doors” scheme, in October 2007 and was given a “poor” quality rating. The owner and manager were required to obtain a new fridge unit, so that their own food could be kept separate from that of the residents. This is reported to have been done. They were also required to replace a worn fly screen on an external kitchen window. The inspector was told that a fly screen had been bought, but had yet to be installed. Finally, they were required to ensure that they left nothing overnight to be cleaned up. The inspector was told that this had been their practice thereon. The owner and manager have been maintaining the Environmental Health service manual “Safer Food, Better Business” since the middle of December, and a scan of records of recent fridge and freezer temperatures showed that they were invariably in line with recommended standards. There is one communal WC / bathroom on the ground floor and it has an integral shower attachment so that residents have a choice, plus a hoist and grab rails. Each bedroom has an en-suite WC and hand-basin. This clearly ensures these facilities are readily accessible to them and that privacy is assured. There is also a separate WC for staff use only – in line with recommended standards. Bedroom furniture and fittings have been judged generally compliant with the provisions of the National Minimum Standards, and all rooms had been personalised. One resident has a lockable drawer and the rest have been Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 provided with lockable cash tins, and these have been appropriately secured against a firm immoveable surface, as a precaution against theft. Each bedroom has a telephone point for private landline, though this would be at the resident’s own expense. Every bedroom also has a TV point – though the provision of personal TVs is also at the resident’s own expense. Since the last inspection the standard locks on bedroom doors have been replaced with double acting locks, which can be locked from the inside, but can accessed from outside in the event of an emergency. All bedroom doors have magnetic door closers linked to the fire alarm system, so that they can be left open to suit individual preferences but will slam shut when the fire alarm is activated. The bedrooms are linked with a call bell system, which can only be reset at source, in line with recommended practice. Spot checks of maintenance records indicated that they were up to date and that there were no outstanding matters requiring attention. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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): Quality in this outcome area is adequate This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 27, 28, 29, 30 27, 28. Residents’ needs are generally well met by the day to day staffing arrangements, and the presence of the proprietors helps ensure they are in safe hands at all times. 29. Service users are generally adequately supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy, though practices will need to be further tightened. 30. Residents benefit by the proprietors’ qualifications and experience, but there needs to be more investment in staff training, to ensure best practice standards. EVIDENCE: Both proprietors live on site (on the first floor of this property) and are involved in the direct care of the residents as well as working in a supernumerary capacity. There is a handyman and a gardener who each work on an “as and when” basis. The home’s own feedback exercise over Christmas indicated a high level of satisfaction with the level of care and team working. Since the last inspection, the home has recruited two permanent part time staff to replace the agency staff it had been relying on – this should provide even better continuity of care. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Both files were selected for closer examination. Records confirm that the home’s recruitment practice was in each case subject to the completion of an application form, two references, and a satisfactory Enhanced CRB check. There was a Contract of Employment in each case. However, although there is a detailed induction checklist on file, which should address a range of personnel and care principles, only the first page of this 3page document had been completed in each case. The owner and manager will need to ensure that residents’ are more robustly protected by the home’s induction practices. See section on “Management and Administration” for findings in respect of staff supervision. With the introduction of two permanent staff, the proprietors are now in a better position to demonstrate investments in training. A matrix has been put together, to manage this, and some training had been booked but this was not only outside the deadline set by the last inspection, but also outside this site visit. The proprietors have undertaken to fund one member of staff’s NVQ2 training, but there was as yet no confirmation of this. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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): Quality in this outcome area is adequate This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. 31, 32, 33, 36, 38 31, 32, 38. Residents benefit by being cared for by a management team, which is fit to be in charge, of good character and generally able to discharge their responsibilities. 33. The proprietors need to better evidence that the views of people who use their service can influence the way their service is delivered. 36. The proprietors need to demonstrate compliance with their duty to give staff formal documented supervision, to ensure best practice standards to benefit residents. EVIDENCE: Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 One of the proprietors, Mr Sawock, is a retired SRN – and has not renewed his PIN number. He is also trained as the home’s Appointed Person for 1st Aid. The other proprietor, Rita Aubeeluck, is also the registered manager. She is an RGN and has successfully completed her Registered Managers Award. Both proprietors have augmented their qualifications with occasional relevant training. The fact both proprietors live on site and are actively involved in the day-today care of the residents means that there is a shared and visible line of accountability; and staff, residents and relatives always know who to talk to. There was, however, no evidence of formal staff supervision sessions to comply with the National Minimum Standard. The member of staff interviewed on this occasion said that she had good day-to-day management support, but too much reliance is being placed on verbal instruction and day-to-day oversight. There needs to be a better balance with documented evidence, for inspection purposes. Over the Christmas period the proprietors formally sought the views of service users and their relatives about the home. Feedback was very positive. However, these views were not publicised e.g. in the home’s Service User Guide. There is, moreover, no formal annual development plan for the home, based on a systematic cycle of planning, review, or evaluation against the outcomes for service users, to measure the home’s success in meeting its aims, objectives and statement of purpose. This is required. The arrangements for managing residents’ finances were not inspected on this occasion, as families and other parties outside the home’s control have responsibility for this. Spot checks of maintenance records indicated that they were all up to date and that there were no outstanding urgent matters, accepting that the owners report having taken steps to address matter raised by their “Scores on the Doors” inspection in October 2007 – this will be subject to a follow up inspection by Canterbury City Council in due course. Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 X X 3 X 2 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 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 2 3 3 3 X 3 3 3 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 2 29 2 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 3 2 X X 1 X 2 Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 2 Standard OP30 OP33 Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 31/03/08 31/03/08 3 OP36 12, 18, 13 All staff to receive induction training to NTO specification 24 There needs to be a formal annual development plan for the home, based on a systematic cycle of planning, review, or evaluation against the outcomes for service users, to measure the home’s success in meeting its aims, objectives and statement of purpose. 18(2) There needs to be evidence of formal staff supervision sessions to comply with all the elements of the National Minimum Standard 29/02/08 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 service user guide should contain the range of possible fee prices DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Rockrose 2 OP3 The home could usefully set up an admission procedure / checklist to certify the issue of a Statement of Purpose, Service User Guide and contract; and whether other languages or formats were warranted, as well as preadmission visits. The home should ensure that it has a photograph of each resident on file and these should show the identity of the resident in question and the date the photograph was taken. Both are recommended, as a safeguard should records fall into disarray or a resident go missing, so that others can rely on their currency. Records should document in more detail how residents are being stimulated through leisure and recreational activities, on and off site. A training plan should be developed to record past and planned training to make sure that staff are trained in all essential areas 3 OP5 4 5 OP12 OP38 Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Maidstone Office The Oast Hermitage Court Hermitage Lane Maidstone ME16 9NT 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 Rockrose DS0000023526.V358011.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!