Inspection on 22/06/05 for Rosebridge Court

This inspection was carried out on 22nd June 2005.

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

Rosebridge Court 18/10/06

Rosebridge Court 15/02/06

Rosebridge Court 12/10/04

Rosebridge Court 25/05/04

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

CARE HOME MIXED CATEGORY MAJORITY OLDER PEOPLE ROSEBRIDGE COURT Darby Lane Hindley Wigan WN2 3DU Lead Inspector Bernard Tracey Announced 22 June 2005 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People and 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. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rosebridge Court Address Darby Lane Hindley Wigan WN2 3DU 01942 526240 01942 526270 Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Active Care Southern Cross Healthcare Services Limited Vacant CRH (N) Care Home with Nursing 46 Category(ies) of Adults with Dementia over 65 years DE(E) (24) registration, with number Adults with Mental Disorder under 65 years MD of places (22) ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Within the maximum registered number 46, there can be up to (24) Adults with Dementia over 65 years DE(E) and (22) Adults with Mental Disorder MD. 2. The service should employ a suitably qualified and experienced Manager who is registered by the Commission for Social Care Inspection Date of last inspection 12th October 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Rosebridge Court is a purpose built care home situated on the outskirts of Hindley town centre, close to shops and other amenities, and is on the main bus route. The home is built on two floors providing nursing care for 24 male and female service users with dementia on the first floor, Darby Unit, and 22 male and female younger adults with enduring mental illness on the ground floor, Allendale Unit. Personal accommodation is provided in single rooms with en suite facilities. There are large communal lounges and separate dining rooms on both units. The home is owned by Active Care Partnership a subsidiary of Southern Cross Healthcare Plc. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The home had been informed that the inspection was to take place on the 22nd June 2005 and had been requested to ensure that residents and relatives were aware of the inspection. The inspector also wrote to General Practitioners, Community Psychiatric Nurses and Social Workers involved in the home asking for their comments. Two social workers and a doctor returned comment cards and all felt the home provided a satisfactory service. One social worker said that she “felt the home has improved”. The inspector took the opportunity to speak with a total of 2 relatives and 10 residents. A total of 7 members of staff including the deputy manager, were interviewed both individually and as a group. A tour of the facilities was undertaken and the Inspector also took the opportunity to read through records relating to how the care of residents was planned and carried out including how the younger people spent their time during the day and how they were supported in taking personal responsibilities for themselves within their own capabilities. What the service does well: The home demonstrates that they are able to make very good assessments of residents before they come into the home to make sure that they can care properly for each person. One resident said he had “come here from another home and this is far better. Everything they said at my assessment was true and even though they offered a trial I knew this was going to be the right one” Residents and relatives felt that the staff were caring and committed to providing the best care they could. Relatives spoke of a feeling of confidence in the staff. Staff members were described by residents as “lovely”, “friendly” and “patient” - “ you can have a laugh with them”. Some felt they had developed a good relationship with the staff. Observations made during the inspection indicated that there was a relaxed and easy relationship between residents, visitors and members of staff. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 On the whole the care staff said that the home was a good place to work and felt they were given the opportunity to receive training to help them do their job better. Two newer members of staff who had come from abroad said they had been given training and support to help them settle into the job. Relatives spoken with said they felt they are kept informed of the care provided, one said “ I can approach Sarah she is wonderfully kind and professional” another relative who visits his wife regularly said “ she (his wife) was always dressed neatly and always looked well cared for.- the staff are absolutely wonderful” Residents spoke positively of their experience within the home and felt that the staff treated them well. On the Allendale unit residents made comments such as “ even though it would be great to not have to be here the staff treat us well” “staff are kind and helpful” “ you can have a laugh “ . What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The medical cover for residents referred to the Allendale unit has still not been resolved despite the best attempts of the home. Temporary arrangements are in place but are not satisfactory and the company that owns the home are aware of this and are trying to resolve the problem. Action has been taken to help the younger people to have a varied day to include different activities but more work is needed to allow individuals to spend time carrying out their own interests and hobbies. The home did make a start last year with providing new bedroom furniture but the work has come to a halt. The bedrooms on both Allendale and Darby Units need decorating and replacement beds, bedding, carpets, curtains and furniture. The replacement furniture must be suitable to ensure that residents can store their belongings in a satisfactory way. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 The need to fill the vacant manager post is being addressed by the owners and these efforts must continue to ensure the home has a manager registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. 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. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home Health and Personal Care Daily Life and Social Activities Complaints and Protection Environment Staffing Management and Administration Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Older People (Standards 1–6) (Standards 7-11) (Standards 12-15) (Standards 16-18) (Standards 19-26) (Standards 27-30) (Standards 31-38) Adults 18 – 65 (Standards 1–5) (Standards 6-10 and 18–21) (Standards 11–17) (Standards 22–23) (Standards 24–30) (Standards 31–36) (Standards 37–43) ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 (Older People) and Standards 1 – 5 (Adults 18 – 65) are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 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. Prospective service users have an opportunity to “test drive” the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. 6. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 (Older People) and Standard 2 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) EVIDENCE: The key standards were not inspected on this occasion. They will be inspected at the next inspection. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 (Older People) and Standards 6-10 and 18 –21 (Adults 18-65) 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. Including their physical and emotional health needs. 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. 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. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. The Commission considers standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 (Older People) and Standards 6, 7, 9, 18, 19 and 20 (Adults 18-65) are the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7 8 10 (OP)and 6 7 9 18 19 20 (Adults 18-65) There is a clear and detailed care planning system in place that includes residents’ involvement and provides the staff with the information needed to meet the needs of the residents. The arrangements in place ensure that the residents’ physical and emotional health care needs are being adequately met. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 The residents from outside the district do not have adequate medical cover from the psychiatric services resulting in difficulties in accessing consistent medical advice without travelling some distance. EVIDENCE: Darby Unit Residents receive a formal assessment from a qualified member of staff using a detailed assessment format. The care management assessments and the hospital care plans are obtained prior to admission to the home, and a copy is held in the residents’ notes. Individual care plans are in place for each resident. The care plan is generated from the single care management assessment and the assessment provided by the home. The plan sets out how the current and anticipated needs are to be met. Relatives spoken with during the inspection said that they felt “very involved in the care of their relative” alongside care staff who were said to be “ marvellous the way the look after all the residents – staff are very caring” and “ I would not change anything”. Relatives spoken with during the inspection said they are involved in the drawing up of the care plan and understood the meaning of a care plan to describe the assessed needs of a resident and how the needs were to be met. The care plan would also include any changes in the resident’s condition. Signatures in the care plans, indicating that the individual agreed with the plan and any alterations made to it after consultation with the individual, confirmed this involvement. Risk assessments are in place for service users and records are maintained in the service user care plan. One resident who had a fall during the inspection had a recorded and detailed risk assessment with associated care plan in regard to falls. The Unit manager operates an open door style of management, encouraging relatives to approach her with any problems or worries. A relative spoken with at the inspection stated she was satisfied that she could approach the unit manager with confidence at any time and “always found Sarah to helpful, kind and very professional”. Allendale Unit ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 As with residents on the Darby Unit individuals receive a formal assessment from a qualified member of staff using a detailed assessment format. The care management assessments and the hospital care plans are obtained prior to admission to the home, and a copy was seen in the residents’ notes that were examined during the inspection. Any potential restrictions on choice, freedom, services or facilities that become part of the residents’ daily life, had been discussed and agreed with the resident during assessment, and recorded in the care plan, including details of the use of keypads on exit doors. Two residents spoken with confirmed that they had been given “good and full information about how the home is run before coming in the place.” Information in respect of residents is shared within the home team and visiting professionals in the interests of the resident. In this respect it also necessary for the home to share personal identification and some medical detail with the local police when concern surrounds an individual who is absent from the home without prior arrangement and the home feels that the person may be at risk. Procedures for responding to unexplained absences and who should be notified are confirmed in a written policy. The care plan is generated from the single care management assessment and the assessment provided by the home. The plan sets out how the current and anticipated needs are to be met. There is evidence that the resident together with family, friends or advocate are involved in the drawing up of the plan. Care plans examined had been reviewed on at least a monthly basis, which is above the necessary requirement of this standard. The review of care is conducted on a group basis that involves the resident, the key worker and the named nurse and on occasions the representative. All of the reviews are recorded and signed by the participants. Wherever possible residents are encouraged to manage their own finances and at the time of the Inspection most residents were taking personal control over their money, but where the home does manage the finances for individuals, records are maintained and a recognised tool for audit is incorporated in the monthly review of finance supplied to the Registered Provider by the home’s administrator. Two residents said they were aware of their own care plans and had been into the reviews with the staff. One resident said he “didn’t know he had a care plan but neither do I care. If I’m treated so well here does the care plan make any difference because the staff treat all of us extremely well.” ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 The unit manager, who has been in post for approximately 12 months, gave a detailed account of recent initiatives she and her staff had introduced into the home which included a Well Me Clinic in respect of the residents physical well being including smoking cessation classes, weight reduction classes and the involvement of the Primary Care Team with regard to assessments by the continence nurse and visits to the GP surgery for blood samples to be taken as well as eye and ear examinations. A newsletter has been published on a quarterly basis and includes details of planned outings as well as general news items. This has started as a response to a request from the residents in their regular monthly meetings with staff. The home is hoping to develop this further, when they have installed a home computer for the residents’ use. In a group discussion with four residents the general agreement was that staff cared well for the residents and they felt they were consulted in regards to how the home was run. Comments such as “there is not a downside to the place because they look after us well” and ”this is the best unit I been to staff are good to me” summed up the feelings expressed in the discussion. Observations made during the inspection indicated that staff had developed a good rapport with residents and there were several examples of spontaneous and humorous interactions with residents and staff. An example was where a resident was saying how much he liked a particular carer saying “ he is really good kind and helpful” when the carer overheard this he said “ you mean you want me to get you a cup of coffee with two sugars and a couple of fags” and both laughed. Five minutes later the resident was seen to have the coffee and fags and he winked at me. This was one of many good interactions seen during the inspection. Arrangements for appropriate access to specialist medical care, unavailable for service users on the Allendale unit at the last inspection have still not been finalised. Since the departure of the Responsible Medical Officer, previously employed by the Registered Person, the home have been in consultation with the Primary Care Trust and Team Leader of Social Services to secure arrangements for out of area service users, to have access to local psychiatric medical care to meet their assessed need. The home is still in the process of arranging medical officer cover but in the mean time the residents’ referring medical officer is giving medical cover. This means that reviews of care require the resident to travel some distance to see their responsible medical officer and there have been occasions when a resident has refused to travel because of the distance resulting in missed appointments. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 (Older People) and Standards 11 – 17 (Adults 18-65) are: 12. 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. Including opportunities for personal development. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. And have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. 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. 13. 14. 15. The Commission considers standards 12, 13, 14 and 15 (Older People) and Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12 13 14 15 16 17 Allendale Unit The home has made progress in implementing a varied individual activities programme, but further development needs to take place so that residents feel they are supported in pursuing personal interests and hobbies. The dietary needs of the residents are well catered for with a balanced and varied selection of food available that meets the residents tastes and choices. The home valued the role which relatives continued to play in the lives of the service users who clearly benefited from this contact. EVIDENCE: DARBY UNIT The key standards were not inspected on this occasion. at the next inspection. ROSEBRIDGE COURT They will be inspected Version 1.30 Page 15 F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Allendale Unit Staff are seen to support residents in the activities of daily living, which in the case of some individuals is presently fully meeting their needs, but arrangements must be put in place to enable residents to take up opportunities in relation to education and training activities. A programme of meaningful activities, agreed with the individual resident, implemented and supported by the care staff is a requirement of this report. There has been considerable progress in addressing the general routines of daily living, through a structured programme, but further development of individual activities and educational opportunities needs to be addressed. During the inspection residents stated that “more trips out” and “more meaningful things to do” were important to them and this has been recognised as a need to do better through a questionnaire organised by the Deputy and Unit Manager. Care staff support service users in accessing local facilities for leisure and shopping, according to the assessed needs of the individual. Staff support residents in ensuring access to public transport as well as the organised trips to places of interest and enjoyment, suggested by the residents. Residents are encouraged to participate in the political process through the opportunity to vote in local and general elections. Residents on Allendale Unit spoke of the plans to have a holiday this year but final details had not been completed. The unit manager confirmed that she was presently collecting information on suitable accommodation and destinations, but was confident the holiday would go ahead. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 The Unit manager described how she was attempting to gain free access to other leisure facilities such as the swimming baths. Residents on Allendale Unit spoke of the plans to have a holiday this year but final details had not been completed. The unit manager confirmed that she was presently collecting information on suitable accommodation and destinations, but was confident the holiday would go ahead. Members of the care staff maintain residents’ right to privacy, dignity and respect. Staff members were observed to obtain permission prior to entering the individual’s personal accommodation and used the service users preferred form of address. Personal residents who require help with understanding or completing forms such as benefit applications. Freedom of movement for an individual is identified within the care plan and agreed with the individual following the assessment of risk. The inspector took the opportunity to have a lunchtime meal with a group of residents. The meal, roast pork, vegetables, roast and boiled potatoes was well presented and appropriately served. A choice of tea or a cold drink was offered. The meal was well cooked and tasty and confirmed by residents that this is usually the case. Residents informed the inspector that the food is always served in adequate portions. Special diets are catered for. Staff helped residents who required assistance to eat and drink, in a sensitive and dignified way. The opportunity to make snacks and prepare individual meals is available in the unit kitchen. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 – 18 (Older People) and Standards 22 – 23 (Adults 18-65) 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. Including neglect and selfharm. The Commission considers standards 16 and 18 (Older People) and Standards 22 and 23 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) EVIDENCE: The key standards were not inspected on this occasion. at the next inspection. They will be inspected ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 (Older People) and Standards 24 – 30 (Adults 18-65) 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. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. And lifestyles. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers standards 19 and 26 (Older People) and Standards 24 and 30 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19 26 The standard of the decoration within the home is, in the main, poor with little evidence of continuing improvement through an ongoing refurbishment plan. Both the communal and personal accommodation does not present as an attractive and homely environment for the residents to live in. EVIDENCE: A programme of re-decoration of the personal and communal accommodation had begun in the past year but there was no evidence that the home has continued with this. Personal accommodation throughout both units, in particular, does not provide residents with a homely and comfortable setting. Following the last inspection in October 2004 the Registered Provider agreed to ensure that the decoration and refurbishment of the home would take place but this has not occurred. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 Some rooms have had replacement wardrobe and chest of drawers but the programme to replace all of the old bedroom furniture has not been carried through to include all of the rooms. The design of the wardrobes that have been provided do not have sufficient space in which residents can store their clothes. Several wardrobes were seen to have clothing and jumpers/cardigans stored on the floor due to the absence of shelving within the design. The replacement chairs in the lounge of the Darby Unit are not constructed of a material to withstand incidents of urinary incontinence and several residents were seen to have an incontinence pad placed on the seat of their chair. The majority of bed frames and mattresses throughout the home need replacing. The Unit managers informed the inspector that they have compiled an inventory of decoration and refurbishment requirements for each unit as well as a ‘wish list’, that is now with the Provider for consideration. All of the shortfalls identified by the inspector, had been included in the inventory. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 (Older People) and Standards 31 – 36 (Adults 18-65) are: 27. 28. 29. 30. • • • Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. 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. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. 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 27, 29 and 30 (Older People) and Standards 34 and 35 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at leat once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) EVIDENCE: The key standards were not inspected on this occasion. at the next inspection. They will be inspected ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 (Older People) and Standards 37 – 43 (Adults 18-65) are: 31. 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 a well run home and from competent and accountable management of the service. 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. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. • The Commission considers standards 33, 35 and 38 (Older People) and Standards 39 and 42 (Adults 18-65) the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31 34 35 The manager post is vacant at the time of the inspection and the post has been advertised. There is a need to appoint a manager to the home so that residents, relatives and staff have a clear vision of how the home is to be run. The quality assurance and monitoring systems ensure the views of service users and relatives were utilised to improve the service EVIDENCE: At the time of the inspection the home does not have a manager in post. The Registered Provider has advertised and interviewed for a manager without success but is hoping to appoint to the post following interviews due to take ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 place in July 2005. The management of the home is being overseen by the Deputy, who had previously managed the home but had decided to step down from this position to become more involved in the day-to-day treatment of residents. From discussions with residents and members of staff this arrangement is not having a detrimental effect in the short term. Darby Unit There are no residents who are able to control their own finances within the care of the older people service, therefore the residents’ representative manages their financial affairs. Allendale Unit Residents on the Younger Adult Unit are encouraged to retain control over their own finances and are supported in doing so by the care staff. Residents spoken with at the inspection confirmed that the home does hold their money for security reasons “but access is always problem free”. Three residents spoken with said that they have a bank account into which their personal allowance is held, otherwise their representative controls the finances. Written records of all transactions were available and of those examined, appeared to be accurately maintained. Personal allowances are not pooled and receipts are kept for any purchases made on behalf the individual. A safe is available for storage of valuables. The company audits personal accounts independently. The home provided the inspector with the results of a recent quality audit that had been produced from a questionnaire completed by residents relatives and visiting professionals. The home had considered the responses included in the survey and produced a summary available to all of contributors. Residents spoken with at the inspection confirmed that they had contributed to the quality audit and as one said: “ I hope they keep on doing what they do well because it is good here but if they can do some of the other things that were suggested – even better”. ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 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 x 2 x 3 x 4 x 5 x 6 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE ENVIRONMENT Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 STAFFING Score 1 x x x x x x x Score Standard No 7 8 9 10 11 Score 2 3 x 3 x Standard No 27 28 29 30 x x x x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 x 14 x 15 x COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No 16 17 18 Score x x x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No Score 31 2 32 x 33 x 34 3 35 3 36 x 37 x 38 x ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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 12 Regulation 16 Requirement The home must ensure that a programme of meaningful activities, agreed with the individual resident is implemented and supported by the care staff The home must ensure that arrangements are in place for residents to receive treatment, advice and other services from a medical officer. A programme of decoration and refurbishment to all of the personal accommodation must be provided within the timescale stated. A programme of decoration and refurbishment to all of the corridors and communal lounges must be provided within the timescale stated The Registered Provider must appoint a manager registered with the Commission for Social care Inspection to manage the home Timescale for action 1st August 2005 2. YA 19 13 1st August 2005 3. 19 23 1st August 2005 4. 19 23 1st August 2005 5. 31 8 1st September 2005 ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 25 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 None Good Practice Recommendations ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Turton Suite, Paragon Business Park Chorley New Road Horwich, Bolton BL6 6HG National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI ROSEBRIDGE COURT F56 F06 S5696 Rosebridge Court V221168 220605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 27 - 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!