Inspection on 05/03/07 for Rose Court

This inspection was carried out on 5th March 2007.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Good. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 3 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Rose Court 12/01/09

Rose Court 21/11/05

Rose Court 07/08/05

Rose Court 10/03/05

Rose Court 12/01/05

Rose Court 16/04/04

Rose Court 05/03/04

Similar services:

Claremont House

Coopers Mill Ltd

Sun Court Nursing Home

Bramley Avenue (73)

Paradise Lodge

Grangewood

Upaya Ananda

15 Bramble Close

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Rose Court 12 Bradgers Hill Road Luton LU2 7EL Lead Inspector Katrina Derbyshire Unannounced Inspection 5th March 2007 11:45 Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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 Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rose Court Address 12 Bradgers Hill Road Luton LU2 7EL 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) 01582 482288 rose.court@craegmoor.co.uk info@craegmoor.co.uk Parkcare Homes Limited Ms Amanda Middleton Care Home 10 Category(ies) of Learning disability (10), Physical disability (10) registration, with number of places Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 21st November 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Rose Court is a home for ten adults with learning disabilities, which is divided into two living units with six on the first floor and four on the ground. There are facilities on the ground floor for service users with a physical disability. Each service user has a single room with en suite facilities. There are additional toilets on each floor and on the ground floor there is a communal bathroom with a fixed hoist. A staff office is provided in each unit. There is a communal lounge, dining room and kitchen on each floor. There is a conservatory, which is used as the managers office. Work is in progress to restore the large garden so that it is usable. Rose Court is located in a residential area of Luton. A local college is within walking distance and the town centre, where there is a shopping precinct, various restaurants, pubs, cinema and sports facilities, is a short car ride away. The rail and bus stations are close by with a direct link to London and other major cities. The fees for this home are £657.51 per week. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The purpose of this visit was to undertake a key inspection. This unannounced visit took place on 5th March 2007. The Deputy Manager was present throughout the inspection. During the inspection communal areas and private rooms in the home were visited and the inspector. The care of two residents’ was examined by looking at their records and interviewing the residents’ and staff who look after them. The views of residents were also received and their feedback has been used alongside information from the home through a pre inspection questionnaire to assess the outcomes within each standard. Evidence used and judgements made within the main body of the report include information from this visit alongside their views. Observations of care practice and communication between the residents’ and staff was also made at the inspection. The focus of this inspection was to look at the key standards and to follow up on previous requirements. What the service does well: Residents feel that staff at this home treat them as individuals and give them the support they need to try and fulfil their personal potential. The way the home supports residents in maintaining personal relationships is very good. The staff enable residents to continue to visit, telephone and welcome their friends and family into the home. Residents are also able to make day-to-day decisions about their own lives: From the clothes that they wear, how they spend their day to social activities in the evening. Residents regularly choose to go into town shopping, participate in the day-to-day chores within the home. How the staff speak to and support the residents is also very good. They always make sure that the residents are treated with dignity and respect, making sure that they always knock on the door before entering and always checking that the residents are safe. The way the staff manage medication on resident’s behalf at this home is good. Staff follow systems in the home so that stocks of medication needed by the residents are always in place and stored correctly. Also records show that staff give out the medication as the Doctor has prescribed. This means residents benefit from a level of well being associated with having medication on time and when needed. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The standard of pre admission assessment at this home is good so management have sufficient information to ascertain if they are able to meet the needs of the residents. EVIDENCE: Information seen within the care records of residents showed that a system was in place to assess the needs of prospective residents. The home was noted to use a standardised document to record their assessment of needs. In addition information from the referring agency was also seen providing a comprehensive background concerning the resident’s life. Residents are invited to visit before deciding to move in to the home, meals can be taken and there is a possibility of an overnight stay. One resident confirmed that they had been given a choice as to whether they moved into the home, even though they had lived there for several years now. They also recollected being asked to give their views about their own needs and how they felt staff could support them in meeting their needs. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The changes in the standard of care planning at this home are good, providing staff with clear guidance on how they should support the residents to meet their individual needs. EVIDENCE: The home maintains care plans on each of the residents; each care plan is directly linked to the assessments undertaken so that there is a plan in place, for each assessed need. Care plans set out any rehabilitation plans or communication development for the resident, and were clear in any restrictions on choice or freedom in place following a detailed risk assessment. Residents were aware of the care plans and spoke of their involvement supported by staff in their development. Care plans seen for one resident were noted to be of a higher standard than the others examined. The plans of a higher standard were the revised system being implemented at the home to introduce person centred planning. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Residents through discussion confirmed that they liked living in the home and felt their privacy was respected. Management had sought the services of an advocacy group for those residents who did not have any other representation. Documents that described varying activities undertaken by residents were seen. The activity had been described and it gave clear guidance on the required support needed for each resident, so that any risk associated with that activity would be reduced. Risk assessments were also in place on individual files relating to fire safety associated with smoking, and the physical support required by the resident. Observation of the physical and emotional support offered to one resident during the inspection so that the risk to that resident was reduced was noted to be carried out appropriately, this support had been described in the residents records. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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 & 17. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The support available to residents from staff at this home is sufficient for them to maintain and develop family and other close relationships in their lives. EVIDENCE: Residents’ support plans gave clear information about how they should be supported to develop and maintain skills, including hopes and aspirations. All residents were engaged in a range of meaningful activities in and out of the home, giving them opportunities to have new experiences and develop skills. One of the residents whose care was tracked on this inspection attended Day Service facilities. Within the individual files of the resident the inspector saw documents, which listed the varying programmes they attended to assist them in their personal development. All residents had opportunities to participate in the home weekly shop and on the day of inspection all had been out on Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 varying trips and programmes. Another resident was working towards supported living. Documents submitted by the home to the Commission for Social Care Inspection showed that residents also attended the local College. One resident described the varying activities that they participated in day-to-day and how they choose what they want to do or where they want to go, on the day of this visit for example they had been in to town as they were looking to buy a handbag. When the resident’s returned from their day at the day centre it was observed on several occasions instances in which all residents had opportunities to be independent in their use of communication, social and living skills. Entries within the care records described the social and leisure activities the residents’ had received. Records viewed on the day of inspection indicated that activities that had been provided for example were shopping trips, walks and going out for a pub meal/drink. The Deputy manager advised the inspector that when they arrived many of the residents had gone to the pictures and were then going for something to eat. The care records seen identified very different individual interests of the residents and they were specific in the identification of their preferred leisure interests, regular contact with family members and visits to their homes were also included. Residents’ informed the inspector of their favourite things that they liked to do and these included for one an interest in music; which they had access to and another resident had a special interest in dog’s and their own room reflected this. The home do not have a planned menu. Staff alongside residents go to the local supermarket for the food shopping. There are two kitchens in the home and residents and staff depending on ability cook the meals at the home, lead by resident choice. Comment cards completed by residents and returned to the Commission for Social Care Inspection indicated that they were satisfied with the food at the home. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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 & 20. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Staff support residents in accessing healthcare so that they benefit from these specialist professionals in reaching a good level of well being in their individual health. EVIDENCE: There was documentary evidence that the home accessed outside healthcare professionals and services as required; in order to meet the healthcare needs of resident’s. The home is supported by a variety of health and medical advisors through a local clinical resource centre. Medical visits were being recorded separately to daily notes, and a variety of healthcare monitoring charts were in use. One of the residents spoken with confirmed that they were able to see their General Practitioner when needed, staff would arrange the appointment for them and in addition provide transport to the local surgery if they needed it. The home was supporting a number of residents with specific health care issues and/or a sensory impairment. The home had also initiated a Health Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Action Plan for all residents, with the appropriate healthcare professionals in accordance with the guidance from the Valuing People White paper 2001. Medication stocks were examined. Medication administration records had been signed and gave clear information on the medication to be given and the times that this should be done. The Deputy Manager has overall responsibility for ordering the supplies of medicines for the residents at the home. Medication was seen to be stored in a locked cupboard. Training records submitted by the home showed that all staff designated to administer medication had received training in this area. Within the care records examined specific entries had been made to guide and direct staff in how resident’s wished to receive personal care. One entry indicated a specific request by a resident on how staff should ensure that their privacy was maintained. Staff through discussion demonstrated an awareness of this and confirmed that this guidance was followed. Observation at this visit of the support offered to one resident when they required assistance, showed staff to communicate with them in an appropriate manner. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.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 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The homes policy for the protection of vulnerable adults is clear so residents would benefit from the protection and support of a multi disciplinary approach. EVIDENCE: As assessed at the previous inspection the home continued to have a very clear complaints procedure, which detailed how a resident could complain, to whom and how long they would wait before they received a response. Staff when questioned were able to accurately describe the actions that they should take when receiving a complaint as detailed within the homes own policy. Residents confirmed that they were aware of their right to complain and had been made aware of the homes policy, all written feedback sent to the Commission for Social Care Inspection through returned comment cards indicated this. Staff training records confirmed that staff had received training in protecting vulnerable adults. In addition the homes policy for the protection of vulnerable adults contained all required information, for example the types of abuse including physical and financial. Staff were interviewed and although they could not fully describe the exact referral route of all suspected abuse, they did describe the need to follow the homes procedure and that they would follow its instructions. They did state that Commission for Social Care Inspection and the Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 police would be contacted. This policy did state that the local policy on the protection of vulnerable adults must be followed. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The general maintenance of the environment and furnishings in some areas of the home is good however some areas are in need or re decoration to create a pleasing and pleasant environment for all residents to live in. EVIDENCE: The home was seen to be separated in to two areas, 6 residents communal accommodation was in one area and four in another. The Deputy manager advised that there were plans to replace the kitchen units on the first floor kitchen. Along the ground floor corridor the walls were noted to be very marked and scuffed, an explanation was given that this had been caused by a wheel chair. However the height of these markings and those seen in the ground floor living room were not conducive with this. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The carpet on one of the staircases was also worn and a hole had developed on the lower step as a consequence of this. In addition one of the radiators was leaking and a bowl had been placed underneath to catch the drips. No radiator guards were seen to be in place, the temperature of the radiator checked was very high, the risk of burns to a resident falling against this would be very high and a requirement is made. Other areas in the home were also seen to require improvements including the staff facilities and bathrooms both of which had broken fittings, raised flooring and chipped tiling. The standard of cleanliness in the home was seen to be of an acceptable standard. Resident’s individual rooms were noted to reflect their individual personalities. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34 & 35. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The arrangements for the training of staff are good with the staff demonstrating a clear understanding of their roles. EVIDENCE: Training and development plans for staff were submitted by the home to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. These included mandatory and specialist training courses, and included LDAF (Learning Disability Award Framework) induction training, medication training, and NVQ’s. Staff also confirmed that training was always available and that this had been the case throughout their employment with the home. Information supplied shows that 25 of staff holds a National Vocational Qualification in Care at level 2 or above, and 4 more staff are working towards their awards. A check of staff files was undertaken to look at recruitment practices. It was noted that the files contained proof of identity, references and that Criminal Records Bureau clearance had been obtained prior to commencement of employment. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Records examined showed that supervision of staff was being undertaken in accordance with the National Minimum Standards. Staff through discussion confirmed this. Staff demonstrated genuine friendliness towards residents, and provided support in a respectful and sociable manner. As a consequence, a relaxed atmosphere was noted in the home. Residents spoke positively of the staff at the home, one resident said, “ l like them all, they are my friends”. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 & 42. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The manager has a clear vision for development of the home so residents benefit from improvements in the standard of care and support that they receive. EVIDENCE: The manager of the home holds the Registered Managers Award. The home as previously reported continues to be well run by the manager and deputy manager who are very committed to ensuring that residents receive the care they need and are helped to lead as independent lives as possible. All residents and staff spoken with spoke very highly of the manager and her approach and commitment to the home, all felt that she helped everyone to strive for the best that they could. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 The home seeks the views of residents at meetings and encourages the involvement of advocates. Staff and training records showed that they had undertaken training relating to health and safety matters, including fire safety and food hygiene. Fire safety checks were undertaken alongside food temperature checks and records of these were seen. Risk assessments had also been undertaken and gave clear guidance to staff in how they could reduce the level of risk. However radiators with a high temperature were not covered or guarded and has been addressed within the environment section of this report. Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 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 2 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 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 NO Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA24 Regulation 23 Requirement Re decoration of the ground floor accommodation described within the report must be done to create a homely environment for the residents. Action must be taken to ensure residents are not at risk of burning themselves against the radiators. The carpet described within the report must be made safe to ensure a safe environment for both residents and staff. Timescale for action 31/05/07 2. YA24 23 30/04/07 3. YA24 23 31/03/07 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Bedfordshire & Luton Area Office Clifton House 4a Goldington Road Bedford MK40 3NF 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 Rose Court DS0000014955.V329843.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!