Inspection on 15/11/06 for Royley House

This inspection was carried out on 15th November 2006.

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

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

Other inspections for this house

Royley House 11/05/06

Royley House 14/09/05

Royley House 18/04/05

Royley House 15/11/04

Royley House 28/04/04

Royley House 28/01/04

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 Royley House Lea View Royton Oldham OL2 5ED Lead Inspector Carol Makin Unannounced Inspection 15th November 2006 04:31 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 Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Royley House Address Lea View Royton Oldham OL2 5ED 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) 01616334848 01616339191 Roche Care Limited Care Home 41 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (15), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (41), of places Physical disability over 65 years of age (10), Sensory Impairment over 65 years of age (5) Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Service users to include up to 41 OP, up to 15 DE (E), up to 10 PD(E) and up to 5 SI (E). 11th May 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Royley House was opened in October 2000 and is a purpose built residential care home for 41 older people. The home is located off Middleton Road in Royton and is close to shops and amenities. Accommodation is provided over two floors, both floors having separate lounges, dining rooms and bathrooms. All bedrooms are spacious, single rooms and many provide en-suite facilities. The range of weekly fees are: £313.89 - £430.00, which does not include the following: hairdressing; newspapers; magazines, and toiletries. A copy of the commission’s most recent inspection report is available at the main office. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. A key inspection of Royley House has been carried out which included unannounced site visits to the home on 15th & 16th November 2006. During the visit, the inspector spoke with residents, a visitor, the manager, the deputy and assistant managers, care, and catering staff, carried out an inspection of the premises, and examined records. There had been a change of manager at the home since the last inspection. The new manager had been in post since 31/7/06. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? There had been a significant improvement in several areas since the last inspection, and all of the requirements from that inspection had been addressed. Improvement included: a new system of assessments, care plans, reviews, and new care files; an increase in activities for residents; new system of staff supervision; recording in general was clearer and more detailed; changes to the lounge/dining accommodation; some redecoration and re-carpeting of bedrooms, and the provision of a ‘residents shop’. It was noted that the cook had been awarded the ‘Heartbeat Award’ by Oldham Council’s Environmental Health Department on 14/11/06. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2&3 Quality in this outcome area is good. Contracts with the home are available to provide a legal basis for residents’ conditions of residency. Assessments of prospective residents care needs are completed before they move into the home, thereby ensuring that the home is able to meet residents’ needs. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The files which were selected for inspection contained contracts of residency which had been signed by the resident’s representative. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Pre admission assessments of residents needs were also in place on the files. The homes own assessments were clear and detailed. Where necessary an assessment from a care manager in the community was also available. The manager said that prospective residents had visited the home with relatives prior to admission. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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): 7,8,9,10 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents’ health, personal and social care needs were set out in an individual plan of care, and are met in the home. Some further improvement was needed in relation to procedures for dealing with medication to ensure safety for the residents. Residents’ rights were respected and maintained by the staff in the home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection a new system of care plans and assessments of needs and risks, had been implemented. The care plans and risk assessments that were in place on files that were inspected had been reviewed regularly, and Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 relatives had signed a care plan and risk taking agreement on behalf of residents. At interview staff said they were very pleased with the new system and made comments such as, “They’re lot better and clearer, I know what to do to meet the resident’s needs”, and “they are easy to follow and give us good guidance”. Nutritional assessments had been completed, records showed that residents’ weight had been recorded regularly, and food/fluid charts were in place where a specific risk had been identified. A record was kept of involvement/visits by healthcare professionals. Residents felt that their health care needs were met and made comments such as “They keep their eye on your health, and they weigh you”, “They look after you in everyway”. A sample of residents’ medicine records was checked, and found to be in order, with the exception of some errors in recording of medication which was in boxes, because the residents had not been in the home long enough for their medication to be included in the monitored dosage system used in the home. These matters were discussed with the manager who said that she would address the problems with staff and speak to the local pharmacist. All the staff who are responsible for the administration of medication were said to have received the necessary training, and ‘up dates’ were planned for the first quarter of 2007. See standard 7 in relation the administration of medication during the night. Residents said that staff treated them with respect, and their rights to privacy and dignity were maintained within the home. Comments included: “They keep it nice and private when I have a bath, they keep the door closed”, and “ They very much respect privacy and dignity, and I’m very keen about that, they don’t just come in, they knock on the door”. At interview staff confirmed that respecting residents rights is an integral part of their training. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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): 12,13,14,15 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents were able to exercise choice within the daily routine of the home. Activities were sufficient to meet resident’s needs, and provide them with stimulation. Residents were able to maintain contact with relatives and friends, providing them with links with the wider community. There was evidence that residents were offered a wholesome and varied diet, and that they were able to exercise any control over their diet. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: There had been a significant improvement in the provision of activities since the last inspection. The residents and staff who spoke with the inspector were Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 pleased with the changes. Their comments included: “We had a good night out the other week”; “ I likes the sing songs, we had one yesterday, I knew them all”; “I enjoyed the quiz night, my daughter came to it”; “The exercise games are good”, and from staff - “There are more activities for the residents now, they really enjoyed an outing for a ‘pub lunch’ recently”, and “There’s loads more to do – residents are much happier because there’s so much going on for them, - I like getting involved myself”. Information about activities, and photographs from outings and events were displayed in the home. A dinner party for residents and their families/ friends had been organised for 21/12/06. There had been a good response, and numbers were limited due to space, and it was therefore booked up, but the manager said that she planned to do another event in the new year for those who had missed this one. Residents felt that the routines of daily living within the home were flexible, and enabled them to make choices. This was also reflected in assessments and care plans which noted individual preferences such times of getting up and going to bed, diet, having a key to their room. Residents also had the choice of not joining in with activities if they wished, e.g.“ I like to be in my own room, it’s very comfortable and quiet, and I like to read”, “They have meetings but I’m not a meetings person”, “I went to the quiz night recently and enjoyed it, they didn’t pressure me to go”. Residents and a visitor who spoke with the inspector confirmed that visiting was able to take place at any reasonable time, and said that visitors were made welcome by the staff. Their comments included; “My sons visit anytime they like and they’re made welcome – the staff bring tea round”, and “ My family are here every night – they come to do’s here at night”. Overall residents were complimentary about the food provided, and they made comments such as: I’ve no grumbles whatsoever, we have a marvellous breakfast – cooked if you like”, “You can have meals in your room if you wish”, ”I do enjoy the food, there’s generally 2 choices”. The menus were clearly displayed in the home, and showed choices at each mealtime. The inspector sampled some of the food and found it to be hot, tasty, and well presented. The dining areas, which are provided on the 1stfloor, were furnished and decorated to a satisfactory standard. It was noted that the cook had been awarded the ‘Heartbeat Award’ by Oldham Council’s Environmental Health Department on 14/11/06. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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 & 18 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. Residents were confident that any complaints they may have would be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Some staff did not have the necessary training to protect residents from abuse. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home had a written complaints procedure, and records are maintained of complaints received included correspondence in response to the complainant. A complaint, which the manager had referred on to the local authority was in progress at the time of the inspection. The residents who spoke with the inspector said that they would refer any complaints they may have to the management of the home, and were confident that they would be dealt with appropriately. Comments made included: “I’ve no complaints whatever, but if I did I would go to the manager, she deals with everybody efficiently, she’s very nice, I could go to her if I had Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 any problems”; “ I would tell the manager, she would sort it out”; “Val, is very nice – I would go to her – she’s sorted a lot of things out for me”. Staff spoken to also expressed confidence that complaints would be appropriately dealt with by the manager, e.g. “The manager is approachable – I would go to her for advice or with complaints, I’m confident she would deal with things properly”, and “I would go to the manager with a complaint – she would deal with it”. Staff who were interviewed were able to demonstrate an awareness of different forms of abuse, and knew what do if an incident of abuse was to occur in the home. The inspector was informed that many of the staff had received training regarding ‘Abuse’. Fifteen staff had the training in March 2006, but several staff had left the home during 2006, and 12 members of staff who were new or had returned from maternity leave during the year, were waiting for training, which was planned for February 2007. Oldham Social Services and the home’s own policies and procedures regarding the protection of vulnerable adults were available for staff. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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 &26 Quality in this outcome area is good. The accommodation was clean and decorated to a satisfactory standard, and residents were able to benefit from a programme of routine maintenance and renewal of furniture and fittings. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Standards of cleanliness within the home continued to be maintained. At the time of the inspection it was clean, warm, and comfortable, and no unpleasant odours were detected. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 The accommodation was nicely furnished and decorated, and a programme of redecoration continued to be implemented with some bedrooms having been redecorated and had new carpets fitted since the last inspection. During that time the 1stfloor dining room with a non - smoking area, had become a lounge, and the lounge had become a dining room. A shop had also been provided in a small room on that floor, promoting residents’ choice and independence. Residents’ rooms were personalised with possessions of their choice to meet their needs, and make the rooms homely. Those who spoke with the inspector were satisfied with the accommodation and the laundry service, their comments included: “I’m pleased with my room – they do keep it clean”; “ The room’s always nice, and it smells nice”; “ It’s very clean and always warm enough”, and “I’ve got my own bathroom and toilet”; “They have a smashing laundry”; “you can’t fault them on that”, “perfect – the jumpers are lovely – I couldn’t get them any cleaner myself”. Aids to independence were provided in bathrooms and toilets, and there was ramped access to the property. The manager said the problem with the hot water supply to one of the bedrooms had been solved to a point, in that the water was hot but it was slow to come through. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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): 27,28,29,30. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. The staffing levels and training provided were such that the care needs of the residents were being met to an adequate standard. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The information, which was obtained for the inspection, indicated that the number of staff on duty within the home at the time of the inspection met the standards. The manager said that there were enough staff on duty but this was due to staff doing extra shifts, and she was therefore recruiting more staff. She had also discovered that the staff who were on duty at night had not had medication training, and senior staff on call at home were brought in if any residents needed any medication during the night. She had taken action to address this by recruiting a senior carer for 4 nights a week and was in the process of recruiting another senior carer to cover the other 3 nights, both of whom were listed for medication training at the earliest date available which was in February 2007. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Information provided for inspection showed that the procedure for recruiting staff which was in use at the time of the inspection, met the standard required. Management staff confirmed that the programme of NVQ training was continuing. Six members of staff completed NVQ 2 in July 06, and new carers were being employed on the understanding that they enrol to undertake the training if they did not already have the qualification. Records showed that some catering and domestic staff had also achieved an NVQ in catering and housekeeping. A training programme for the period April 2006 to March 2007 was in place. The programme included some specialist training relating to the categories of need for which the home is registered, i.e. dementia, challenging behaviour, pressure ulcer guidelines, diabetes, osteoporosis & falls, and oral health, together with medication (see S9),‘abuse’ (See S18), and some safe working practices (See S38). Induction training was arranged with Oldham Social Services Department, which provides ‘Skills for Care’ induction training for new staff. At interview staff gave details of training which they had received and that which was planned. The manager said that she in the process of reviewing staff training. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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): 31,33,35,38. Quality in this outcome area is good. Management and administration systems are in place resulting in the home being run in the best interests of the residents. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The new manager had been in post since 31/7/06. She has many years experience as a registered manager providing residential care for older people, and her qualifications include NVQ 4 and the Registered Managers Award. Her Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 application for registration with the commission was being processed at the time of the inspection. Since she took over, the manager has made many improvements, as noted previously in this report, (e.g. a new system of care planning and assessments, increased activities). Residents and staff were very positive about her performance and the impact that she has had on the running of the home, and she is popular with them. Comments included; “I like the new manager, everybody does”; “Val’s very nice - I would go to her if I had any problems”, “She deals with everybody efficiently, she’s very nice”. “She’s so organised”; “ I get good support from her”, “The manager’s very approachable”, “Staff morale is good”. Mr Salim Mahmood (representing the registered provider) who had called into the home at the time of the inspection, he told inspector that the owners were very pleased with the manager and the improvements which she had made in the home. A visitor who spoke with the inspector was positive in her comments about the home, she said, “It’s quite well run. I think they’re very caring here”. The manager was in the process of doing surveys. She reported that 15 questionnaires from residents, and 11 questionnaires from staff, had been returned at the time of the inspection. Arrangements were also in hand to survey visiting health and social care professionals when the ‘current’ surveys have finished. A ‘suggestion box’ was in the entrance area for general use. Meetings had taken place for residents on 7/11/06, for staff in August and October 06, and for relatives/ friends of residents on 27/9/06 (30 attended). Minutes of all the meetings were available. The residents and members of staff who spoke with the inspector described the meetings as ‘useful’. Their comments included: “The meetings are very useful, I can have my say”; “I like the meetings”, “I speak my mind at the meetings and they act on ideas put forward”. The following reports of visits to the home by the registered provider in accordance with Regulation 26 were available in the home 23/10/06, 21/9/06, 21/8/06, copies of the reports are also sent to Commission for Social Care Inspection. Residents’ personal allowances were not checked on this occasion due to a problem with access to the safe. They will therefore be checked at the next inspection of the home. Manager was developing a new system of staff supervision. She had devised a format and work books for staff, and had begun with supervision of moving and handling techniques, whereby senior staff observed practice, and completed an assessment tick list. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Improvements were needed in the recording in the ‘accident book’, specifically: • • • More detailed information is needed. Statements such ‘fell when transferring’ are not sufficient. Staff must not speculate the reason for the accident, they should state whether they had witnessed the accident or whether the resident had told them how it had occurred. Reports must be signed and dated by the member of staff who discovers the accident. The manager said that she had already noted the high number of accidents recorded in the book and she was doing an ‘accident analysis’, to identify any common factors/trends/times etc. An examination of the fire precautions records indicated that tests and checks in relation to fire precautions had been done at the prescribed intervals. In relation to staff training, there was a fire drill involving 18 staff members on 5/9/06, and training from an external trainer on 20/10/06. Records also showed that individual staff had received training as part of their induction. Maintenance records regarding the passenger lift, water sterilisation, and a gas safety report were available in the home. Information was provided about training in safe working practices in 2006 which included: basic food hygiene; moving & handling, and infection control, and training which was planned between January and March 2007 which included: basic food hygiene; health & safety; infection control; moving & handling, and first aid. Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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 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 2 3 X X N/a HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 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 2 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X X X X X X 2 Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 OP9 Regulation 17 (1)(a) Requirement The manager must ensure that the procedure for recording medication, which is not included in the monitored dosage system, is reviewed and improved to provide sufficient guidance for staff, and avoid errors occurring in recording. Timescale for action 20/12/06 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 OP27 Good Practice Recommendations The registered provider should make sure that staff who are trained to administer medication are on duty in the home during the night to ensure that residents receive medication without delay when they need it. The registered person should ensure that that access to the safe is available when required. The manager should ensue that staff provide more detailed information when recording in the accident book. 2. 3. OP35 OP38 Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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: 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 Royley House DS0000005518.V320212.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!