Inspection on 12/01/06 for Rush Court

This inspection was carried out on 12th January 2006.

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

Rush Court 28/07/05

Similar services:

Flint House

St Vincents

The Cotswold Home

Fairways

Newbeech House

Winton House

Treloar College

Hillyfield Rest Home

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Rush Court Shillingford Road Wallingford Oxfordshire OX10 8LL Lead Inspector Philippa MacMahon Announced Inspection 12th January 2006 09:30 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 Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rush Court Address Shillingford Road Wallingford Oxfordshire OX10 8LL 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) 01491 837233 01491 826723 Elizabeth Finn Homes Ltd Mrs Pierrette A F Gifford Care Home 50 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (50), Physical disability (3) of places Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. The maximum number of persons with nursing needs must not exceed 35. The PD category is for service users aged 50-65 years only. The total number of service users must not exceed 50. Date of last inspection 28th July 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Rush Court is registered to provide nursing and personal care for up to 50 male and female service users. The maximum number of service users with nursing needs must not exceed 35. There are three beds registered for service users aged between 50 and 65 years with physical disabilities. Registered nurses are on duty 24 hours a day and are assisted by care assistants. Accommodation is provided in single bedrooms and most have en-suite facilities consisting of toilets and washbasins. There are also six assisted bathrooms, a physiotherapy room, hairdressing salon, library (which is also used as a chapel) and an activities room. The public rooms are spacious and extremely well decorated and furnished. There is a wide range of activities available and service users are actively encouraged to maintain their independence for as long as possible. The home has large, well-maintained gardens and is near to the market town of Wallingford. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an announced inspection and the second to take place in the inspection year. The inspector received a warm welcome by all the staff and residents and all co-operation was given throughout the inspection process. Care plans were examined, and discussed with the Clinical Care Manager, and Residential Care Manager. Meals and mealtimes were discussed and enjoyed with a group of residents. Meeting the Chef and kitchen staff, and the Hotel Services Manager followed this. The inspector toured the building and observed the grounds. Records, policies and procedures were examined and discussed with the Administrator and Registered Manager. The inspector took time to meet with residents and staff to gain an insight into life at Rush Court. The pre-inspection questionnaire returned by the Registered Manager along with Commission for Social Care Inspection relatives’, residents’, and visiting professionals’ comments cards were also included in this inspection. What the service does well: The home is very well managed and provides an elegant and tranquil environment for the residents, surrounded by beautiful well-groomed gardens and grounds. The quality of the care provided is excellent and this is supported by a strong emphasis on staff training and development. The provision of an interesting and varied social and activities programme to match the residents’ life style. There are good quality monitoring systems in place. The residents are treated as individuals and with dignity and respect. Many of the staff have worked at Rush Court for a number of years and feel privileged and valued, both by the Registered Manager and the residents. The standard of cleanliness is of a very high standard throughout the home. Meals and mealtimes are excellent and in the words of the residents spoken to “The home knows how to party well and Christmas was a most splendid feast”. Special birthdays and anniversaries are celebrated in style, and on Saints’ days wine is provided with the meals! Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 One of the residents spoken to was impressed by the standard of the laundry service and in particular her personal clothing. 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. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): None of these outcomes were addressed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9 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): 7,8. Every resident has a care plan in which their assessed care needs are identified and the action required to meet those needs. Every effort is made to ensure that the residents’ care needs are fully met. The residents are very well looked after and are the focus for any change or improvements in the home. EVIDENCE: A sample of care plans was examined both in the nursing and residential wings of the home. These were found to be comprehensive and gave a clear “picture” of the individual resident and their care needs. The care plans were regularly reviewed, and there is evidence of good integration of information regarding both the physical and social needs of the residents. Wound care is very well documented and there are good systems in place to provide evidence of the progress of the healing process. Specialist nurses attend the home to provide expert advice and support to the nursing staff, and ensure that the residents receive the most up to date care. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 Physiotherapy is provided in the home and is available to all the residents if required. The inspector spoke to one of the Physiotherapists and gained a good insight into excellent integration of care and team working. The home has instigated its own prevention of falls system that has dramatically reduced the number of falls in the home. This involved training and awareness raising for all the staff about the way they provide care. This is commendable and is a good example of the home providing “best practice”. Residents spoken to are very appreciative of the care provided and expressed that the care provided is first class. One of the residents said that she is probably fitter and has a better quality of life than she would have had living on her own. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 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): 15. The catering service and provision are of a very high standard and exceed the expectations of the residents. EVIDENCE: The inspector joined the residents for lunch in the delightful dining room. The food provided was most attractive, well cooked, and delicious. Staff were observed to assist the residents in a kindly and appropriate manner. The Chef takes time to meet with the residents on a regular basis and gives the opportunity for any comments to be made. Copies of the menu were made available to the inspector and showed that a wholesome and nutritious diet is provided. The home knows how to party well and “Christmas was a most splendid feast” according to the residents. Special birthdays and anniversaries are celebrated in style, and on Saints’ days wine is provided with the meals. The residents who took lunch with the inspector commented on the issue of the knives being blunt. They understood that it was probably for their own safety and well being but it was a source of irritation. This was further Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 discussed with the Registered Manager who will look into the issue to see if this can be rectified. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 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): 16,17,18. The Registered Manager takes complaints very seriously and the systems in place are robust. Residents are able to take part in the civic process if they wish to. The residents are protected from all forms of abuse. EVIDENCE: A copy of the complaints procedure is posted in the main entrance hall and included in the Service Users Guide. The inspector examined a complaints file that is kept and the correct procedure had been followed in dealing with complaints. Many of the residents like to take part in the civic process and a number visit the polling station whilst others have a postal vote. The inspector examined a copy of the training plan and the induction training plan and the protection of vulnerable adults issues are included. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 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): 19,26. The residents enjoy a beautifully appointed and gracious home, set in wellmaintained and attractive grounds. The Laundry and domestic service are of a very high standard. EVIDENCE: The inspector found all areas of the home to be cleaned and maintained to a very high standard. One of the residents commented “this is more like a country hotel than a care home”. A new laundry facility has been provided and is much appreciated by the staff working in this area. The laundry was found to be clean and orderly, and kept in accordance with health and safety regulations. Residents were asked what was good about the service provided at Rush Court, and one of the issues raised was “the laundry of our personal clothes is Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 so good”. The laundry and domestic staff are to be commended on the service they provide. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29,30. The number and skill mix of staff on duty at any time is at a level to allow staff to give quality time to the residents. The care provision at Rush Court is underpinned by a real commitment to training and development of all staff. The home’s recruitment procedures and practices are in good order. EVIDENCE: Staff rotas were examined and showed that sufficient numbers and skill mix of staff are on duty at all times. The home has its own “bank staff” and does not need to use Agency staff. The Clinical Care Manager also takes responsibility for the training and development programme within the home. She is very committed to the development of skills and knowledge of all staff to underpin the care provided in the home. NVQ training is well embedded and there are 13 NVQ assessors including the home’s administrator to support this. 65 of the care staff have achieved NVQ level 2 or above. The Clinical Care Manager, and the Residential Care Manager have both achieved the NVQ Managers award within the last 6 months, and are to be congratulated. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 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): 33,35,37,38. The management of all aspects of the home is totally focused on outcomes for the residents. The quality assurance systems in place underpin this. All necessary policies and procedures, checks and balances are in place to safeguard the residents’ financial interests, rights and best interests. EVIDENCE: The inspector examined the quality audit tool that is used by the organisation and is completed on a monthly basis by the Registered Manager. This is very comprehensive and matches the National Minimum Standards. A residents’ satisfaction survey was carried out in October 2005, covering all aspects of the care provision. A report of the findings and subsequent action was supplied to the inspector. This survey will be repeated year on year and forms part of the overall development plan for the home. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 Letters of commendation are shared with all the staff. The company are looking into the possibility of working towards the Investors in People award, or some other quality assurance system in the New Year. The inspector met with the home’s administrator to look into how the residents’ financial interests are handled. A new policy and procedure are being introduced whereby individual pouches are kept in the safe and small amounts of money will be kept on the residents’ behalf to cover any items of expenditure such as hairdressing, and newspapers. Receipts of all transactions are kept within the pouches. Explanatory letters have been sent to the relevant people who manage the residents’ financial affairs as the home does not manage any of the residents’ financial affairs. The inspector examined records, policies, procedures and documents required by regulation and found them to be complete, up to date, and in good order. All staff receive mandatory training in fire safety, food hygiene, moving and handling, COSSH and the protection of vulnerable adults. The kitchen was inspected and found to be clean and orderly with the correct systems in place to ensure the environmental health regulations are met. There are plans to refurbish the kitchen and the Registered Manager informed the inspector that this is in the home’s development plan for the year 2006/7. Firm plans and time frames have not yet been finalised. Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 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 3 8 4 9 X 10 X 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 X 13 X 14 X 15 4 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 3 18 3 3 X X X X X X 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 4 28 3 29 4 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X X X X X X 3 Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 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 Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 Commission for Social Care Inspection Oxford Area Office Burgner House 4630 Kingsgate, Cascade Way Oxford Business Park South Cowley Oxford OX4 2SU 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 Rush Court DS0000065412.V267017.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 - 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!