Inspection on 29/09/05 for Seagull

This inspection was carried out on 29th September 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 found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Seagull 25/11/08

Seagull 30/11/06

Seagull 30/06/05

Seagull 14/10/04

Seagull 06/05/04

Similar services:

Hillview Farm

Dalewood Respite Care

Orchard,The

REACH Upton Court Road

Fairways

Treloar College

Pinta

Kestrel House, St Anne`s Opportunity Centre,

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Seagull 2 Witbank Gardens Shanklin Isle Of Wight PO37 7JE Lead Inspector Neil Kingman Unannounced Inspection 29th September 2005 10:15 Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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 Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.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 Adults 18-65. 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. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Seagull Address 2 Witbank Gardens Shanklin Isle Of Wight PO37 7JE 01983 864850 01983 864850 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) Islecare `97 Limited Mr Christopher Geoffrey Stewart Hyland Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Learning disability (6) registration, with number of places Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 30 June 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Seagull is a home providing care and accommodation for up to six people with a learning disability. It is managed by Mr Christopher Hyland on behalf of Islecare ’97 Ltd. The home is a detached two-storey property set in its own reasonable sized grounds and situated in a quiet residential area of Shanklin. A convenience store is within walking distance from the home and the town of Shanklin with its shops, amenities and leisure facilities is approximately a halfmile away. There is a large garden to the rear which is available for residents’ use. Off-road parking is to the front of the building. There is no lift to the first floor and residents on that level are fully ambulant. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection of Seagull took place unannounced over 3½ hrs. Two residents were in the home at the time, two returned from day services at lunchtime while two were due to return at the end of the day. The inspector toured the building with the manager, inspected a sample of the home’s records and spoke generally with all staff on duty. Due to the residents’ cognitive impairments it was not possible to fully engage with them. However, the atmosphere was friendly and good-humoured and the residents looked relaxed and happy. Three very positive questionnaires were received from relatives. The home was found to be meeting all but one of the standards assessed. Core standards not assessed on this occasion had been assessed at the last inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: In general terms the home is well run and meets the standards assessed. However, it is important that Islecare policy in respect of Adult Protection reflects government and social services guidance. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 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. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 The home ensures that residents’ needs are met with the skills and experience of the staff, effective communication and access to specialist services. EVIDENCE: There have been no new service users admitted to Seagull for over three years and all current residents are long term. They all have cognitive impairments and minimal verbal communication. The home provides long-term care/support and not dedicated intermediate care. Staff turnover is generally low. Of the three support workers who have left Seagull since the last inspection, two have been transferred to other homes in the Islecare group. Staff skills are developed with statutory training and short courses in Downs Syndrome, Epilepsy, challenging behaviour and Person Centred Planning. Currently 99 of the staff group are qualified at NVQ level 2 or above. Records show that one resident has an independent advocate and the others have family involvement. The manager said that the home was expecting a visit shortly from a representative of the new advocacy service. Residents’ plans show that where specialist interventions are required the home will access appropriate health care professionals. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 9 Staff enable residents to take responsible risks, details of which are included in their individual plans. Risk assessments contain guidelines for staff on how risks are to be managed. EVIDENCE: The inspector viewed a selection of residents’ care plans in which individual risks were identified. Risk assessments provided clear instructions for staff around daily routines, which are geared to minimising risk. Separate risk assessments were seen to be in place for identifiable risks around the home. Staff support residents to do whatever they want and assess the various activities where risks are identified. It was clear that residents are encouraged to take responsible risks in order not to limit their preferred activity, e.g., when the inspector arrived at the home some staff were playing football in the garden with one of the residents. This resident was later joined by another who also enjoyed football in the garden. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 15, 16 and 17 The home encourages and helps residents to maintain links with family and friends. Residents are given freedom of choice and movement within the scope of their abilities and identified risks. Food served is varied and appealing to the residents. Although offered three times daily, there is flexibility to allow for residents who attend day services and other outside activities. EVIDENCE: Residents’ plans provide information about friends and family. All but one residents maintain close links with their families, either away from the home or having families visit them at Seagull. The home encourages family and friends to visit and contact normally takes place in residents’ rooms or in the lounge. A questionnaire from one relative described how staff made them feel welcome on visits. Where individual residents have their own routines and attend different day services throughout the week staff take a flexible approach to routines in the Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 home. On the morning of the inspection four of the six residents were at day services. Two returned in time to take lunch with the others. In discussions with staff it was clear that they accommodate residents’ choices/preferences wherever possible. Choices are only limited on safety grounds and are covered by appropriate risk assessments. Staff do not open service users’ mail without their permission; they address them by their preferred name and afford them privacy when they wish. This has been evident at successive inspections where residents either socialise with each other or spend time alone in their rooms variously through the day. In the past year staff at Seagull have worked to make the garden more inviting for residents with a recently finished gazebo, which will be ready for use next summer. Support workers take turns to cook each day. In a relatively small domestic scale environment staff said the arrangement works well. The inspector saw a four-week menu guide, which showed food served to be varied and nutritious. Staff said they understand residents’ likes and dislikes which they take into account when planning meals, at the same time being mindful of the need for a healthy diet. On the day of the inspection they were trying out a new recipe, which seemed to meet the approval of those who ate it. Salads, fresh vegetables and fruit are always available. This year fresh vegetables have come from the garden, where one of the residents has had an input with staff. The inspector had an opportunity to sit with residents and staff over lunch. The atmosphere was relaxed and friendly. Residents seemed to enjoy the food, which was varied according to their preferences. The menu for the day showed that a cooked meal would be prepared for the evening. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 20 Residents are assessed as being unable to retain, administer and control their own medication. Medication for residents is held under secure conditions and appropriate records maintained. EVIDENCE: Medication is dispensed by means of a monitored dosage system by competent staff that have achieved the B/Tech’1 qualification in medication. At the time of the inspection medication for residents was held in appropriate, secure conditions. Records relating to the safekeeping and administration of medicines were checked and found to be in good order. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 23 The home has a one-page adult protection summary guidance conspicuously displayed for staff, to ensure responses to suspicion or evidence of abuse are robust. However, the Company’s policy and procedure does not accord with the Department of Health Guidance ‘No Secrets’, or local policy produced by the Social Services. EVIDENCE: The inspector looked at Islecare’s adult abuse policy and procedure, updated in June 2005. It was noted that the policy did not adequately reflect the Social Services role as the lead agency in adult protection. This needs to be addressed. However, staff clearly relied on the one page summary guidance that was conspicuously displayed in the hall. They were fully aware of local reporting procedures and confident about reporting issues of concern without delay. The manager said that the company is in the process of arranging a new programme of adult protection training for staff. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 Seagull provides a domestic style of environment, which in general terms meets the needs of those who live there. EVIDENCE: In relation to its structure and layout the home is suitable for its stated purpose, in that it is safe, well maintained and meets residents’ needs in a comfortable and homely way. Seagull is a detached property similar to others in Witbank Gardens. There is a convenience store at the end of the road and the shopping area of Shanklin town is about a half mile away. The inspector toured the building with the manager. Communal areas consist of a good-sized lounge with adequate seating, and a dining area with a table large enough to seat all residents together. The manager confirmed that some seating in the lounge was due for replacement. Residents’ rooms are arranged on both the ground and first floors. They are decorated to a good standard and furnished and equipped to meet residents’ individual needs. The home has a programme of decoration and maintenance. At the time of the inspection all areas were decorated to an acceptable standard. The home is one of several maintained with the help of handymen employed by Islecare. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 The manager said the company responds promptly to all maintenance requests. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 35 Staff at Seagull have appropriate skills and experience to meet the needs of the people who live there. EVIDENCE: There are nine support workers at Seagull, all but one (99 ) having achieved the NVQ at level 2 or above. The manager has completed the Registered Managers Award and has almost completed the NVQ level 4 in care. Records showed that staff undertake a range of training including statutory and service specific subjects, Learning Disability Award Framework (LDAF) induction and foundation training. Islecare has introduced a new ‘fire safety for the carer’ training programme, which all staff are involved with. All staff on duty were spoken with and confirmed that Islecare training is ongoing. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. 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 are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 39 and 42 Islecare has an annual development plan and a process of establishing residents/representatives’ views about the service. Policies, procedures and staff training are in place to ensure so far as is reasonably practicable the health, safety and welfare of residents and staff. EVIDENCE: The Company has achieved the Investors in People Award and has an annual development plan, a copy of which was seen by the inspector earlier in the year. There was evidence of some quality monitoring systems, e.g., monthly visits by a representative of the Company to monitor the conduct of the home, yearly resident reviews carried out by care managers and Company visits to the home from the mainland to carry out quality audits. A ‘seeking your views’ statement is prominently displayed in the hall. With only six residents staff maintain quite close links with the relatives and have frequent opportunities to speak with them. Staff and the manager were clear about picking up on any concerns that relatives may have with the service. In terms of residents’ views in practice staff are well versed in gauging the extent of their satisfaction Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 through experience. Three relatives/visitors comment cards were received at the Commission prior to the inspection. The phrases “totally happy” and “very satisfied” were used to describe their thoughts about the service. There are comprehensive policies and procedures in place to ensure safe working practices in the home and all care staff undertake statutory training, which includes health and safety, food hygiene, first aid, manual handling and infection control. The home’s pre-inspection self-assessment signed by the manager confirmed that all policies and procedures, maintenance and associated records were in place to ensure compliance with regulations and relevant legislation. Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 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 CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score x x 3 x x Standard No 22 23 Score x 2 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score x x x 3 x Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 x x x x x x LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 x 12 x 13 x 14 x 15 3 16 3 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score x x x x 3 x CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Seagull Score x x 3 x Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score x x 3 x x 3 x DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 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 Standard YA23 Regulation 13(6), 18(3) Requirement To ensure the company’s Adult Protection Police and Procedure reflects government and local authority guidance. Timescale for action 31/12/05 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 Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 Commission for Social Care Inspection Southampton, Portsmouth and Isle of Wight Ground Floor Mill Court Furrlongs Newport, IOW PO30 2AA 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 Seagull DS0000012532.V249005.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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!