Inspection on 28/11/05 for Roselands

This inspection was carried out on 28th November 2005.

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

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Roselands 14/12/06

Roselands 08/08/05

Roselands 18/01/05

Roselands 15/09/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Roselands Perth Street Heyside Oldham OL2 5LY Lead Inspector Carol Makin Unannounced Inspection 28th November 2005 09:50 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 Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Roselands Address Perth Street Heyside Oldham OL2 5LY 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) 01706881720 Dignity Care Group Mrs Jacqueline Winterburn Care Home 19 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (4), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (9), of places Physical disability over 65 years of age (3), Sensory Impairment over 65 years of age (3) Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Service users to include up to 9 OP, up to 4 DE (E), up to 3 PD (E) and up to 3 SI (E). 8th August 2005 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Roselands is a privately owned care home, registered to accommodate 19 people. The home is situated in the Heyside area of Oldham and is within easy reach of public transport and local amenities. The building is a detached property with car parking space to the front and gardens to the rear. Accommodation for service users is provided on the ground and first floors and ramped access has been provided externally. There are 13 single bedrooms, of which seven have en-suite toilet facilities, and three double bedrooms, one of which has en-suite facilities. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection was carried out on 28th November 2005. During the inspection the inspector spoke with some of the residents, relatives, the manager and a care assistant, carried out a partial inspection of the premises, and examined records. Verbal feedback of the findings of the inspection was given to the manager during the inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 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 Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The standards in this section were not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: The standards in this section were met at the last inspection, and were not reassessed on this occasion. Intermediate care is not offered at Roselands. applicable. Standard 6 is therefore not Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 10 Residents’ rights were respected and maintained by the staff in the home. EVIDENCE: Key standards 7, 8 and 9, which were met at the last inspection were not reassessed on this occasion. The residents and visitors who spoke with the inspector confirmed that the staff in the home respected people’s rights to privacy and dignity, and they were satisfied with the care provided. Visitors said that staff kept them informed about their relative’s health. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The standards in this section were not assessed on this inspection. EVIDENCE: The standards in this section were not fully assessed on this occasion as they were met on the last inspection. Reference was, however, made to certain aspects of these standards during the inspection, and the findings were positive. Examples were given which illustrated the flexibility of the daily routine, and relatives confirmed that they could visit when they wished and they were made welcome by the staff. Comments from residents about the food were overall favourable with choices available, as well as alternatives for those who did not want the meals on the menu. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 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 inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 The home operates an effective complaints procedure. EVIDENCE: A copy of the home’s complaints procedure was in each bedroom, and displayed elsewhere in the home. A box for comments, complaints or compliments was also available in the hallway near to the entrance of the home. Residents and relatives who spoke with the inspector, said they were confident that the manager would deal with any complaints appropriately. A book was kept to log complaints, with full reports of the nature of the complaint, and subsequent action taken by the home, available in a separate file. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The standards in this section were not fully assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Standards 19, 23, 24, 25 and 26, all of which were met at the last inspection, were not fully reassessed on this occasion. Observations were, however, made about certain aspects of these standards during the inspection, and reference was made to them in discussions with residents and relatives. Satisfactory standards of cleanliness continued to be maintained and no unpleasant odours were detected in the parts of the home that were seen on this inspection. Residents, and relatives speaking on behalf of residents, expressed their satisfaction with the bedroom accommodation, which included personal possessions of residents’ choice to meet their needs, and make the rooms homely. Since the last inspection new bed covers had been purchased, and one of the bedrooms had been repainted. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): The standards in this section were not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: The standards in this section were not assessed on this occasion as they were met on the last inspection. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 & 38 The home was being managed to a satisfactory standard. The home had an appropriate quality auditing system. Residents’ financial interests were safeguarded. Improvement was needed in the recording of accidents involving residents. EVIDENCE: The manager stated that she had completed NVQ Level 4 in care, and three units of the Registered Manager’s Award, which are needed to meet standard 31. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 The quality monitoring system includes an ongoing programme of surveys of residents and other interested parties. An analysis of a survey carried out in August 2005, showed residents’ views of the service provided and their ideas for improvements. Questionnaires were given to 17 residents for the survey, and 15 responded. The manager said that relatives, friends, and an independent advocate were able to help residents to fill the questionnaires in if necessary. An independent advocate also comes into the home approximately every 6 weeks to talk to residents individually. Until June 2005 she had chaired residents meetings. Some residents found the meetings to be useful, but others felt they were not necessary, and the system of talking to residents individually subsequently replaced them. The manager said that questionnaires to enable the staff to comment anonymously on the running of the home were to be distributed in December 2005. Staff meetings were held approximately four times a year. At interview a member of staff said that the meetings were useful, in that staff could air their views, and they provided an opportunity to meet staff from other shifts. Records of money held in safekeeping for residents were selected at random for inspection, and were found to be in order. Tests and checks in relation to fire precautions had been done at the prescribed intervals, fire drills had been held in March, April and June 2005, and eight members of staff received training in fire procedures in October 2005. The emergency call system was also checked each week. Reports of servicing of the passenger lift were available. Individual reports of accidents were kept. More detailed recording was, however needed, and risk assessments to consider why the falls had occurred, and whether any measures could be put in place to prevent further falls. The manager provided the following information, regarding training which has been undertaken by staff in relation to safe working practices: Moving and handling Food hygiene Fire Safety First aid Infection Control 17 staff 9 staff 11 staff 9 staff 11 staff Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 It was suggested to the manager that she may find it useful to devise a chart to show training which has been completed, that which is planned, and the dates when updates of training in safe working practices are due. Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 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 X X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 X 8 X 9 X 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 X COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 X X X X X X X X X STAFFING Standard No Score 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 X MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 2 Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 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 OP38 Regulation 13 Requirement The registered person must ensure that all accidents are fully recorded in the accident book, including a reference to any subsequent risk assessment. Timescale for action 16/12/05 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 Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 Commission for Social Care Inspection Ashton-under-Lyne Area Office 2nd Floor, Heritage Wharf Portland Place Ashton-u-Lyne Lancs OL7 0QD 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 Roselands DS0000005517.V263759.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 - 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!