Inspection on 17/08/05 for Rustington Hall

This inspection was carried out on 17th August 2005.

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

Rustington Hall 04/08/09

Rustington Hall 17/09/08

Rustington Hall 13/09/06

Rustington Hall 30/01/06

Rustington Hall 10/12/04

Rustington Hall 26/07/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Thorndene

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing Station Road Rustington West Sussex BN16 3AY Lead Inspector Helen Tomlinson Announced Wednesday, 17 August 2005, 08.30am, V236423 th The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. 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. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing Address Station Road, Rustington, West Sussex, BN16 3AY Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 01903 775001 01903777502 Littlehampton and Rustington Housing Society Limited. Post Vacant CRH 59 Category(ies) of OP-59 registration, with number of places Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Maximum of 59 of whom 35 persons may be in receipt of nursing care. Date of last inspection 10th December 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Rustington Hall is a care establishment registered to accommodate up to 59 residents aged 65 years or over. 35 of these residents may be receiving nursing care. Half of the establishment was built many years ago as a private house, but this was converted to an establishment to provide care for 24 people some years ago. The second half of the building was purpose built at a later date to accommodate 35 residents in need of nursing care. The 2 establishments are run and registered as 1 care home. In both establishments the bedrooms are situated on 2 floors with a passenger lift to provide access. Communal lounges and a dining room are present in both buildings. The cooking for main meals for the whole establishment is done in the main kitchen in the smaller home and taken, in a hot trolley, to the nursing home. Gardens with seating for residents were present. The property is located in Rustington. a large village near the town of Littlehampton. The care home is in a residential area with easy public transport links. A large car park is available for visitors. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an announced inspection. The inspector arrived at 8.30am and left at 6pm. Over the course of the inspection seventeen residents, three visitors and eight members of staff were spoken with. Staff were observed giving support and assistance. Five residents files were examined in detail and other records were seen as was necessary. A tour of the premises took place. Staff files were examined. One comment card was received from a resident. This was complimentary about the service provided and stated their relative was always welcomed into the home also. What the service does well: Residents benefited from a stable staff team. Many staff had worked at the home for several years. The residents said they liked this continuity and seeing a “familiar face.” Residents said the staff were polite and friendly and worked very hard to make sure they were happy. Residents commented on the cleanliness in the home. They said it was always clean and free from bad smells. They said they could bring in personal possessions from home and make their bedrooms individual to them. There were very favourable comments about the quality, choice and quantity of food served at all meal times. No new residents were admitted to the home without an assessment of their needs having been carried out first. The residents’ care plans contained a large amount of information about the resident’s needs and how these should be met. Residents were living in a well maintained home which was tastefully decorated with some areas particularly homely. Specialist equipment needed for individual residents was available in the home. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Residents’ health assessments should be regularly reviewed as these inform the care to be given to individual residents. All care plans should be reviewed monthly. Written information about wound care should be clearly documented. All bed rails must have protectors fitted when in use. All storage, administration and recording of medication must meet with the guidance of the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. The internal written procedure for reporting an allegation of abuse must meet with the West Sussex guidance, to include other agencies. The outstanding requirement from the fire service visit dated 22nd March 2005 must be completed. The new fire procedure, recently put into place, should be clear to all staff. Fire doors must not be wedged open. Alternatives which meet with the guidance of the fire service must be used. The use of agency staff should be reduced. All checks must be made on new staff to make sure they are fit to work with vulnerable adults. Window restrictors must be fitted if a risk assessment indicates this is necessary for the resident’s safety. Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 7 inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 3 Residents were not admitted to the home unless an assessment of their needs had been carried out. EVIDENCE: Five residen’ts files were examined. A variety of assessments were seen on these files. These included an improved version to be used by staff at the home prior to a new resident being accommodated. This was comprehensive and included all areas of the resident’s life. Where appropriate some other assessments were present, such as social services and nursing assessments. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7,8,9 and 10 All residents had a plan of care documented. Residents health care needs were met. Some practices of medication administration, recording and storage did not meet with current guidance. The resident’s privacy and dignity was respected and protected by staff at the home. EVIDENCE: Five resident’s files were examined. Three of these residents received nursing care and two received personal care. There was a large amount of information present in these files which gave a good picture of the needs and abilities of the individual resident. These plans were not always reviewed monthly as is recommended. For one resident their had been no documented review between February and June of this year. Health assessments were present on file. These included the risk of developing a pressure sore, risk of weight loss, moving and handling, risk of falls and risk of using bed rails. Individual risk Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 assessments were present for individual conditions and these were seen for skin conditions and the level and management of pain. Some of these assessments had not been updated frequently, with one pressure sore risk assessment having no review for 6 months, despite the resident being at risk. The reasons for a change in care were not always evident due to this lack of review of the assessments. The residents receiving personal care had their care plans reviewed monthly. This review was not reflective of the actual care plan, more a summary of the month for the resident e.g. “had a cold this month.” The monthly reviews should be carried out on the care provided to the residents. The progress notes for each resident were not written on a daily basis. This resulted in some lack of continuity when a potential problem was noted. For one resident a change to skin condition was noted on 11th August 2005 with nothing more written until 16th August 2005. All changes to a resident’s condition must be followed up appropriately. The medication was looked at on the unit which provides personal care only. Not all staff who administered medication had received adequate training. All staff must have accredited training and be competent to administer medication. Some residents administer their own medication. A risk assessment was documented for this activity. This required some review in order to make sure the resident was storing the medication safely and that staff were reviewing their ability to continue to self-administer safely. Some unsafe storage of medication in a resident’s bedroom was seen. A number of residents had medication written on the administration sheets which had not been given, as prescribed, by the staff. Staff said the residents were no longer prescribed this medication. All medication which is ceased to be prescribed must be taken off the medication administration sheets and until that is done appropriate use of a code and a cross reference to the person who ceased the medication must be recorded. On the nursing unit one resident had three other residents prescribed creams in his bathroom. Medication prescribed for one resident must not be used for another. Residents said the staff showed them respect when providing assistance and care. They said the bathroom and bedroom doors were always kept shut, that staff were polite and kind. Residents were assisted to be smartly dressed and their preferences considered and maintained. Staff were seen to knock on bedroom doors and await an answer before entering. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12 and 15 Activities which suited the needs of the residents were available. Residents were assisted to maintain the lifestyle they chose. The food was nutritious and appealingly served with a variety and choice which suited the residents. It was served in a pleasant environment. EVIDENCE: Residents were participating in various activities on both the residential and nursing units. A volunteer came in to play scrabble with two residents on the nursing unit. They said they looked forward to this very much and enjoyed keeping their minds active. More residents were welcome to join in if they wished. Residents on the nursing unit had leisure equipment in their bedrooms, such as televisions, music centres and computers. Residents in the personal care unit were knitting to make blankets, had a game of carpet bowls, sat out in the sun and enjoyed informal discussions with staff and each other. Residents spoken with said there were various activities to choose from, if you wanted to join in, but the choice was entirely their own. The past interests, hobbies and social history of the residents was not always recorded on the care plans. This should be done to help staff understand and meet this important part of a resident’s life. Residents commented favourably on the food provided, describing it as “always good” a wide choice being available and their likes and dislikes being Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 respected. Meals were served in a congenial dining room on both units, with some residents choosing to eat in their own bedrooms. Some residents had breakfast in bed if they wished. The menu for the meals that day was on each table in both dining rooms and the rolling menu was on the notice board in each home. The food was cooked in the main kitchen in the unit for residents needing personal care and taken to the nursing unit, a very short distance, in a hot trolley. Residents who required assistance to eat and drink were given this discreetly. Hot and cold drinks were available for the residents throughout the day. The Environmental Health Officer made an unannounced visit whilst the inspection was underway and made no requirements. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 and 18 Residents were confident that their complaints would be taken seriously and resolved. Practices and training in the home protected residents from abuse. The procedures needed up dating to include other agencies were applicable. EVIDENCE: A record of one complaint seen was recorded. The action taken and outcome was documented. A new complaint recording form had been introduced. This had been used for one issue raised. This document gave a more structured way of documenting any complaint, investigation and action taken. Residents spoken with said they were happy to approach any member of staff with any issue, concern or complaint. They felt sure their concerns would be dealt with. No allegations of abuse had been made at the home. Some staff members had completed training regarding the protection of vulnerable adults. Those staff spoken with were aware of their responsibilities to protect the people in their care. Procedures for reporting any allegation of abuse were present. These did not include the reporting of any allegation to social services and had incorrect information regarding the investigation of any allegation. The whistle blowing procedure was an internal procedure with reporting to the line manager and director of the organisation. It should include the staff members rights to involve other agencies if they feel this is appropriate. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19,22,24 and 26 Residents lived in a well maintained environment. Some aspects of fire safety required attention. The specialist equipment residents required was available. Resident’s bedrooms were comfortable and personalised. The home was clean and free from offensive odour. EVIDENCE: The home was generally well maintained, clean, tidy and airy. All areas were free from offensive odour. The nursing unit was purpose built and all areas were suitable and accessible to all residents. The personal care unit was an adapted house. The main lounge had a few steps into it, which presented a hazard to some residents and gave others difficulties when moving from one place to another. Staff were on hand to assist residents up and down these steps and a call bell was conveniently situated for residents to ask for Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 16 assistance. All areas of the home seen were suitably decorated with well maintained fixtures and fittings. The fire doors on the main corridors, in both buildings, were held open with magnets which met with the guidance of the fire service. Some residents discussed with the inspector that their bedroom doors are usually wedged open although they were closed due to the inspection. The fire door to the laundry was wedged open, due to the hot day and the need for ventilation. Fire doors must not be wedged open. Devices which meet with the guidance of the fire service must be used. One fire exit door had a padlock present. This door led to a fire escape which the fire service had requested be inspected by a competent engineer, during their visit in March 2005. This had not been done and the timescale set by the fire service had expired. This fire exit must be made safe. The fire procedure had recently been changed and some staff were unsure of the correct procedure to follow in case of a fire. All staff must be made aware of the correct procedure. Fire drills had taken place with the new procedure and it was recommended that more were done. Residents had access to a call bell, which for many was placed within easy reach. These were present in the lounge areas and bathrooms. Assisted baths of various kinds, a variety of hoists and other moving and handling equipment, pressure mattresses and cushions were used. The resident’s bedrooms, in both units, were personalised with their own photographs, pictures, soft furnishings or furniture. Many had a telephone, television and other leisure equipment. Residents said they were happy with their bedrooms, could bring in their own things, within the space restrictions and make their room comfortable. The home was clean and free from offensive odour. Residents commented on the cleanliness of the home, both their own rooms and the lounges. Staff were seen to wear protective clothing when carrying out personal care tasks and handling food. The laundry equipment was suitable for adequate hot temperature washes and necessary sluices. Appropriate precautions to stop the spread of infection were taken. Sluices were available. Cleaning products were stored safely. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 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 considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27, 29 and 30 The number of staff on duty was suitable to meet the needs of the residents. Some residents felt there were insufficient, well skilled staff on duty at certain times. The recruitment procedures were not adequate to ensure protection for the vulnerable adults in the home. EVIDENCE: The duty rota, on both units, for week commencing 4th August was examined. This showed sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of the residents currently accommodated. It was discussed that there was a high use of agency staff in the home with thirty five shifts having been covered by agency staff in the past eight weeks. This led to some residents feeling there were insufficient experienced staff on duty at some times. The manager discussed that the home was trying to recruit staff currently. The staffing levels should be kept under review and the experience, competence and skill mix be taken into account. On the unit providing personal care three residents needs had recently changed and were requiring increased time. All residents needs must be taken into account when the numbers of staff on duty are determined. The files for two members of staff were examined. These did not contain evidence that all necessary checks, to ensure they were fit to work with vulnerable adults had been carried out. For one staff member there was only one reference on file and this was not a professional reference. There was no Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 evidence that this person had been checked for a criminal record or against the Protection of Vulnerable Adults register. No person must work in the home until the satisfactory checks have been carried out. Training records were kept. Staff had received varied training for the work they did in the home. This included the statutory training for fire safety, moving and handling, medication, health and safety and first aid. Staff spoken with said there were good opportunities for training and some were taking their NVQ qualifications. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 19 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 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 33,35 and 38 The home is run in the best interests of the residents. Residents financial interests were safeguarded. Most practices in the home protected residents although some aspects of fire safety put residents at risk. EVIDENCE: There were several ways that the quality of care was monitored in the home. Residents and staff meetings were held. Relatives questionnaires were done. Staff forums, with nominated members were held. These covered issues of health and safety, risk assessments and training. Residents said they could approach any member of staff with any issues or concerns they may have. They felt they would be listened to and issues acted upon. Staff said they could approach the manager or any other senior manager with any concerns or suggestions. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 No residents finances were managed by staff at the home. A small amount money was kept for each resident. This was safely stored and any transactions recorded. Staff were aware of their role in protecting the health and safety of themselves, residents and colleagues. The windows in the nursing unit had restrictors fitted. Those in the personal care unit did not. Many of these windows opened very wide and the hinges meant they swung outwards when opened. Risk assessments should be carried out for the safety of all residents who are in rooms with no restrictor fitted. As discussed in standard nineteen some issues of fire safety were raised and requirements made. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score x x 3 x x x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 x 14 x 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 x x 3 x 3 x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 x 29 2 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x 2 x x 3 x 3 x x 2 Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 22 NO Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. 2. 3. Standard 7 8 9 Regulation 15 Requirement Timescale for action 30/9/05 31/8/05 31/8/05 4. 18 5. 19 6. 7. 29 38 All care plans must be kept under review and that review documented. 13(4)(c ) All bed rails must have protectors fitted. 13(2) All residents who self medicate must have a thorough risk assessment completed which includes storage and staff checks on medication. All medication must be administered as prescribed. Medication must only be given to the person for whom it is prescribed. 13(6) The procedures for reporting allegations of abuse must meet the guidance of the local authority. 23(4)(b)(c The fire escape identified by the ) fire authority must be inspected and made safe.Fire doors must not be wedged open. 19 and All checks on staff working at the schedule home must be carried out prior 2 to them starting employment. 13(4)(c ) Risk assessments for the fitting of window restrictors should be completed. 31/8/05 30/9/05 31/8/05 31/8/05 Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 23 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. 3. Refer to Standard 8 19 27 Good Practice Recommendations Health assessments should be reveiwed and updated regularly. Written wound care plans should be up to date. All staff should be made familiar with the new fire procedure. The use of agency staff should be recuced. Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection 2nd Floor, Ridgeworth House LIverpool Gardens Worthing, West Sussex BN11 1RY 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 Rustington Hall Dual Registered Wing H610-H11 S24208 Rustington Hall V236423 170805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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!