Inspection on 06/08/08 for Rosegarth

This inspection was carried out on 6th August 2008.

CSCI found this care home to be providing an Adequate service.

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

Rosegarth 07/08/09

Rosegarth 24/04/07

Rosegarth 28/06/06

Rosegarth 07/06/05

Rosegarth 13/01/05

Rosegarth 23/08/04

Rosegarth 19/03/04

Similar services:

Abbey The

Snydale Care Home

Larchfield Manor

Hawkhills

Beeches The - North Yorkshire County Council

The Grove Waltham

Carentan House

Ravensworth Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/11/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Rosegarth Rosegarth 30 - 32 Belgrave Drive Bridlington East Yorkshire YO15 3JR Lead Inspector Jo Bell Key Unannounced Inspection 6th August 2008 10:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.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. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rosegarth Address Rosegarth 30 - 32 Belgrave Drive Bridlington East Yorkshire YO15 3JR 01262 677972 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) Hexon Limited Manager post vacant Care Home 26 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (26), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (26) of places Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: None Date of last inspection 24th April 2007 Brief Description of the Service: Rosegarth is situated close to the seafront in Bridlington. The home comprises three traditional houses that have been joined internally. The accommodation has single and double rooms the majority of which have en suite facilities. There is a pleasant garden and conservatory where the residents may sit and some parking is available at the front of the home. The home is registered for 26 older people, some of whom may have a dementia. The organisation’s Statement of Purpose is made available to all people using the service in the entrance hall of the home and in their rooms. Individual copies are available on request. The charges made by the organisation for care and accommodation range from £360.00 to £375.00. This information was correct at 06/08/08. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 1 star. This means the people who use this service experience adequate quality outcomes. The Commission for Social Care Inspection inspects homes at a frequency determined by how the home has been risk assessed. The inspection process has now become a cycle of activity rather than a series of one-off events. Information is gathered from a variety of sources, one being a site visit. More information about the inspection process can be found on our website www.csci.org.uk The key inspection took place on Wednesday 6th August 2008. A random visit took place on Friday 1st August following concerns raised regarding care practices and whether people were being helped o move I n an unsafe way. Four requirements were made at this time (one has already been discussed and met). It was decided to bring forward the Key Inspection at this stage. Prior to the visit the information from the following sources was obtained and considered: The annual quality assurance assessment and details in the Annual Service Review. Three surveys from relatives. Notifications (Regulation 37) relating to incidents in the home affecting people using the service. Details of complaints or concerns raised by people connected to the service. Progress of the previous requirements and recommendations made at the last site visit. At the site visit one inspector spent 6.0 hours at the home. During this time observations of care practices took place. People using the service were spoken with along with some relatives. Discussions with the manager regarding meeting needs, mealtimes, protecting people and the environment took place. The lunchtime meal was observed and time was spent inspecting three care plans, looking at individual rooms and reviewing a selection of health and safety information. Staffing and management issues were discussed and feedback was given to the manager and general manager at the end of the inspection. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: People using the service could have clearer records regarding risk assessments, accidents and injuries. This will ensure staff know how to care for people effectively. The manager could ensure staff are up to date with all mandatory training, this includes fire safety, infection control and food hygiene. This will help to promote safety and maintain people’s well-being. The manager needs to observe care practices regarding moving and handling. Staff need to be clear which type of moving and handling is suitable. The recruitment practices need to be reviewed. This will help protect people. The medication system needs to be more secured. This will minimise the risk of harm to people who may be able to access the medication room. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 (Standard 6 is not applicable) People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. People are effectively assessed prior to admission, which helps to ensure individual needs can be met. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: People have their personal and health care needs assessed by the manager of the home prior to admission. Those people who have a care manager also have an assessment undertaken through social services. This helps to inform the home’s assessment. The manager is aware of the client group and the needs of people with dementia. Three pre-admission assessments were inspected and these were all detailed with information regarding social history, health and medical needs and the input from other professionals, for example nurses or community mental health team. One visitor confirmed an assessment had taken place prior to admission and this looked at the specific needs of the relative. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.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): 7, 8, 9 and 10 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. People have their health and personal care needs met in a dignified manner. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: People using the service have plans of care drawn up which includes a range of risk assessments. Three care plans inspected confirmed that information was gathered which relates to daily routines of people, their health and medical needs and their social and personal care needs. Once a need has been identified a care plan is drawn up which confirms the action to be taken by staff. Plans have been reviewed and evaluated and auditing of each care plan takes place on a regular basis. This helps to identify any improvements that are needed. People looked clean and well cared for, pressure-relieving equipment was in place and staff confirmed there is support from doctors, district nurses and the Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 community mental health team. This was detailed in the care plans. Risk assessments relating to nutrition, the prevention of pressure sores, falls, the use of bed rails and for moving and handling were in place and up to date. Some of the information was difficult to find and the moving and handling assessments were not always clear One person detailed the technique to be used though this was not up to date and staff were observed using an inappropriate moving technique. The risk assessment discussed the current situation but the care plan did not match this. Generally the home completes Regulation 37 notifications; these detail any incidents affecting the well being of people using the service. On one recent occasion no notification was received. Whilst the accident book was completed there was no evidence as to how one accident had occurred, this was discussed with the manager (see also Standard 37-record keeping.) The medication system was inspected. A detailed procedure is in place and staff spoken with confirmed they had received training in how to administer, record, dispose of and store medication. Senior care staff are responsible for looking after the medication system and an audit system is in place to identify any errors. Monthly stock balances are in place and staff know how to deal with controlled drugs. Three medication charts were examined, on one occasion a tablet was signed for prior to it being administered. This was witnessed. This was discussed with the manager. Security of the medication was also discussed with the manager. The medication room door was left wide open whilst the member of staff went into the next room to administer medication. The drugs trolley was left locked in this room; though on the shelf were syringes, painkillers, constipation medication and an unlocked fridge containing medication. This is poor practice and needs to be reviewed. The way privacy and dignity in the home was addressed by staff, was observed. Visiting healthcare professionals use the treatment room to attend to people. Staff have a good rapport with people and were seen addressing people in a pleasant manner, one relative talked about one member of staff who does not always have a pleasant attitude. The manager is aware of this and is taking appropriate action to resolve this. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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): 12, 13, 14 and 15 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. People participate in a range of activities and visitors are welcomed. Staff encourage autonomy and choice, and people enjoy dining in pleasant surrounding with appealing food. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: People have access to some activities, which are detailed on the notice board. There is a designated carer responsible for facilitating activities. Bingo, dominoes and cards are popular and the garden is currently been improved to allow ramped access from the home into the garden for people in wheelchairs. The home is located close to the beach and staff are able to take a few people out for ice creams, coffee or fish and chips. The television was switched on in one of the lounge areas and the home is considering having another small lounge for visitors to use when they need some quiet. One person was going to the hairdressers (independently) and visits from the local clergy are in place. Staff are aware of different religious needs, which were confirmed in the care plans. One person has a visit from the Jehovah’s Witness faith. There are people who are Roman Catholic and Church of England in the home and their needs are catered for. There is an advocacy service available and the manager Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 is aware of the Mental Capacity Act and the implications for people who do not have sufficient mental capacity to make their own decisions. People are able to get up and go to bed when they choose; this has been reviewed since the last inspection. Three people spoken with all confirmed they get up at differing times and staff help them at night to get undressed and ready for bed. The lunchtime meal was observed and the food was sampled. The dining room is pleasant with plenty of tables and chairs available. Some people have large portions others have their food cut up and staff were clearly aware of how to give assistance in a dignified manner. The food looked appealing with a range of tastes and textures. A choice of cranberry juice, orange or water was offered and two different main courses were observed (lamb hot pot or scampi). Fresh vegetables were served and many people enjoyed a sponge and custard dessert. The crockery is suitable though it may be useful looking at the suitability of people using the service wearing plastic aprons, which are the same as the staff wear. This is the current practice. Material napkins could also be offered. There were enough staff to supervise mealtimes and no concerns were raised regarding the dining experience. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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): 16 and 18 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. People have their concerns listened to and acted upon, and people are safe and protected from harm. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home have an organisational complaints procedure in place. Three surveys completed all confirmed that people know how to complain. Two relatives were spoken with who said they would go to the manager if they had any issues. No formal complaints have been received in the past twelve months. Since the last inspection one issue regarding a person not receiving medical attention in a timely manner has been investigated. As a result of this staff have received abuse awareness training. A random visit took place on 1st August 2008 following an injury to a person where it was unclear how the incident had occurred. This resulted in a safeguarding referral being made by both the Commission and the home. Whist no abuse had taken place it was clear that the home’s record keeping needed improving, and medical advice could have been sought sooner. During the visit people looked comfortable and safe. Training records confirmed that staff are trained in recognising abuse and this was recently updated. The manager is aware of the role social services have and how staff are able to ‘Whistle blow’ their concerns confidentially Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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): 19 and 26 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. People live in a comfortable and clean environment. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home is located near the beach area in Bridlington and is maintained both inside and out with the help of a gardener and maintenance person. The new responsible individual has a plan of redecoration, which includes improving access to the garden and redecorating areas of the home. A new stairs carpet has been obtained and some beds have been replaced. The home is generally safe, and health and safety audits take place. The annual quality assurance assessment highlighted that policies and procedures are updated on a regular basis. The home was welcoming and homely and people spoken with said they felt comfortable. One person said, “I really like my room”. Areas inspected looked clean and smelled fresh. Staff were observed washing their hands, wearing disposable aprons and dealing with laundry effectively. People in the lounge had clean and well-ironed clothes on. Infection control procedures were in place and these were written down as part of a policy. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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): 27, 28, 29 and 30 People who use this service experience adequate quality outcomes in this area. People are cared for by staff that are competent, and generally well trained, though recruitment practices could be improved to help protect people using the service. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: At the time of the visit the home has eighteen people using the service, some of whom have dementia. The home has sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Call bells were answered promptly and surveys received stated that needs were being met. Some staff have completed their NVQ Level 2 and 3 in Care which helps staff achieve a good understanding in care practices. There is a key worker system in place, though one visitor was unsure who the key worker for their relative was. The manager works on the floor a few hours each day, which gives her the opportunity to observe practices. There are both male and female carers with a range of skills and qualifications employed at the home. Induction training takes place, which is equivalent to Skills for Care (standards of care practices-nationally recognised). Training records confirmed this. It was evident that during the morning three people had been offered a drink in the lounge. Prior to lunch all three cups were still almost full and the drink was cold. Staff had not prompted people to drink or recorded that no fluids had been taken. Staff need to ensure people drink enough are properly hydrated and be clear about the implications regarding this if they don’t. Some staff Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 have received training in dementia care and older people, which helps staff, understand this client group. Recruitment procedures were examined and discussed with the manager and general manager. A recruitment procedure is in place, which details the process to be followed when a new person applies to work there. is going to be employed. The information needs to be reviewed, as it is not specific enough. For example two written references need to be obtained, and although the procedure refers to references but not it does not say how many or whether they need to be from a friend or previous employer. A separate policy discusses the CRB check but does not refer to the Protection of Vulnerable Adults check. It may be beneficial if this information is kept in one policy. Staff files were examined. The manager was aware that references and police checks are needed, though in the past year only staff moving from another home owned by the same company have been employed at Rosegarth. Two files showed only one reference had been obtained, and the police checks were not recent. The organisation needs to decide what checks will be undertaken on staff from other homes and how often these will take place. This will help protect people from harm and show clear evidence that the home have taken every precaution necessary to minimise the risk of harm to people using the service. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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): 31, 33, 35 and 38 People who use this service experience adequate quality outcomes in this area. The home is generally run in the best interests of the people using the service, though improvements in some mandatory training and record keeping are needed to ensure risks to people are minimised. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The manager has completed her manager’s award and is experienced in caring for older people. She was previously a deputy manager and has been at Rosegarth for over twelve months as the manager. She does need to become registered with the Commission and has completed an application form in preparation. The manager has a pleasant disposition and is competent and capable to run the home. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The home have a quality assurance system in place, which includes a range of audits regarding health and safety and care practices. Resident’s meetings are in place and questionnaires have been previously sent out by the home to find out people’s views and opinions on the service they receive. One person did comment that there are no relatives meetings. This was fed back to the manager. Care plan, medication and accidents audits are in place and these were examined. The home deal with some finances and records are available regarding people’s personal monies. People can be invoiced and this is discussed with people when they move into the home. This procedure has previously been discussed with the general manager. No concerns have been raised in this area. Record keeping was discussed as during the random inspection on the 1st August. Some of the records were not accessible to the person in charge. This has since been reviewed. Accurate records in care plans, accident books and Regulation 37 notifications need to be specific so it is clear what has happened and what action has been taken. At the random visit because of the poor record keeping and lack of information a safeguarding referral was made. This may have been avoided if the information was up to date and available to look at. Health and safety was discussed. A sample of records was inspected. The electrical wiring certificate was up to date which confirmed the electrical system in the home was safe, the gas system was in date and a fire risk assessment had been completed and regularly reviewed. Records showed regular fire tests take place and throughout the home fire doors, fire extinguishers and smoke alarms were in place. It was evident that staff need to have fire training, infection control and food hygiene training. Staff have recently had moving and handling training but the practice observed did not match with the information in the risk assessments and care plans. One person was moved three times by two staff using an underarm lift to move the person further back into their chair and then from chair to wheelchair. Observations of practice showed that on two occasions people were pushed in wheelchairs without putting their feet on the footplates, and one person was transferred from a wheelchair without the brakes being on. These issues need to be addressed to ensure people’s safety. Aspects of the communal areas were inspected. On the first floor some bedrooms were looked at, and in some cases the windows could open very wide as there were no window restrictors in place. All upstairs windows need to be reviewed and risk assessments should be in place to identify, which people are at risk. The home needs to consider that the client group of older people and people with dementia are vulnerable and may be at risk of harm where restrictors are not in place. This was highlighted to the manager who stated Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 that health and safety checks do take place but window restrictors are not included in this check. Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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 x N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 x 18 3 3 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 3 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 x 3 x 3 x 1 1 Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? No STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard OP7 Regulation 15 Requirement Care plans including moving and handling assessments must be reviewed on a regular basis. The medication room door must be kept locked when it is unattended. This will prevent people having access to a range of medication, which may cause harm to them. Two written references must be obtained prior to employment of staff. This will help protect people. Detailed records in the care plan must be made of any injury affecting a person’s well being. The manager must ensure staff are up to date with infection control training, food hygiene and fire safety. This will ensure the health and safety of people. Risk assessments relating to moving and handling must be specific so staff are clear about how to look after people. People using the service must be moved and handled by staff DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 01/09/08 2. OP9 13 06/08/08 3. OP29 19 06/09/08 4. 5. OP37 OP38 (OP31 17 13 06/08/08 06/10/08 6. OP38 13 20/08/08 7. OP38 18 06/08/08 Rosegarth Version 5.2 Page 23 in the correct way. This will promote safety and minimise risk of injury. 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. 2. Refer to Standard OP27 Good Practice Recommendations Staff need to ensure they check when people are offered a drink whether they drink it or record if it has been left. This will help ensure people get enough to drink. The recruitment procedure could be clearer and more specific. This is regarding two written references, CRB and POVA information. Consideration should also be given to the frequency of CRB/POVA checks and written references for those staff transferring from another home within the same organisation. Staff should use footplates and brakes on wheelchairs when moving people, this helps to maintain safety. Window restrictors should be fitted to the upstairs floor windows this will help minimise risk of injury. OP29 3. 3. OP38 OP38 Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection North Eastern Region St Nicholas Building St Nicholas Street Newcastle Upon Tyne NE1 1NB 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 Rosegarth DS0000055667.V369873.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!