Inspection on 11/08/05 for Seymour House

This inspection was carried out on 11th August 2005.

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

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Seymour House 14/07/08

Seymour House 12/10/06

Seymour House 15/02/06

Seymour House 12/11/04

Seymour House 08/07/04

Similar services:

Thorndene

Insight - Eastchurch

Southfields

Magenta

Seabourne House

33 St John`s Church Road

Dovedale Court

Lyncol House

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Seymour House 9 Queensbridge Drive Herne Bay Kent CT6 8HE Lead Inspector Terry Bush Unannounced 11/08/05 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 Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationary 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. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Seymour House Address 9 Queensbridge Drive, Herne Bay, Kent, CT6 8HE 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) 020 8255 4433 The Regard Partnership Limited Mrs Rachel Clare Brown Registered Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Care Home for Younger Adults (18 - 65) with a registration, with number Learning Disability of places Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1) The persons accommodated will be between 18 years and 65 years 2) No person may be accommodated in the home with severe mobility problems Date of last inspection 12/11/04 Brief Description of the Service: The home is situated on the very outskirts of Herne Bay town centre and benefits from the close locality of the resources and facilities of an established community. It was a former family dwelling which has been extended and adapted to accommodate persons needing residential care. Despite these alterations, the home remains in keeping with the other properties nearby and its purpose is not highlighted. The home accommodates six persons and provides each of them with their own bedroom. Three of the bedrooms exist on the ground floor. This means that the home could provide for persons with mild mobility problems. There is limited car parking to the front of the house, however road parking presents as no problems. The rear garden is enclosed and is a reasonable size for service users to undertake leisure activities or hobbies. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection that was conducted during the late morning and afternoon of one day. There were six service users being accommodated in the home. At the time of the inspection there was two service user in the home; three were out the house undertaking various activities and another was on holiday with their family. There was two care staff on duty who provided direct care. One of them was the registered manager for the home. There are no staff employed in the home to provide indirect care. The inspector spoke individually with both members of the staff to gauge their understanding of their responsibilities and roles within the home. They were able to provide appropriate information as a basis upon which the inspector was able to conduct the inspection process and focus upon key issues and standards. In addition, the inspector spoke with the two residents in the home throughout the inspection. A further resident arrived in the home at the conclusion of the inspection. The inspector was able to generally speak to her about her experiences for the day and the expectations she had for the forthcoming evening. There is limited communal space in the home. The age range of the service users means that the care needs and interests are diverse. This has created some friction between choices and lifestyles for some of the service users. The communal area is shared by the staff and an office area has developed into half the space in a conservatory that is for the use of the service users. This impinges upon their space and reduces their privacy and choices. It also raise issues of confidentiality of records and conversations. The age range of the current client group places some of them into a different registration category. Apart from this the presenting care needs of the service users is diverse. Although the staff are coping with the demands made upon their skills and training with the current resident group, this situation could quickly change and there is a likelihood that care needs of the older service users would not be met. Overall, the home is well run and offers comfortable accommodation in an ambient atmosphere. What the service does well: The home has good established links within the local community. This is used to good effect for the absolute benefit of the service users. The home strives to Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 6 develop and expand its external contacts to provide a diverse aspect of care delivery. 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. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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 standard(s) 1, 2, 4 and 5. Prospective service users are provided with information about the conduct of the home to enable them to make informed decisions about living there. They are also given the opportunity to visit and stay in the home and assess the provision of care. This can vary according to the nature of the presenting needs and the understanding of the service user. The aspirations, wishes and needs of the service users living in the home are regularly assessed and reviewed. A contract of the occupation and the terms and conditions under which this might be terminated is provided to the service user and the placing agency. EVIDENCE: The responsible company produces literature about the conduct of the home together with its facilities and nature of the provision of care. This can be in various easily understood formats. Each of them can be provided to prospective service users. This helps them make informed choices and decisions about being accommodated in the home. Although the persons responsible for the home place particular emphasis upon the information literature about its services, the service users have less regard for its use and prefer to physically view the home, its locality and facilities. This is recognised by the manager who invariably provides a prospective service user the opportunity to pose questions about the conduct of the home and to explore and experience different aspects of the care provided. This is Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 9 undertaken whilst they visit or short stay at the home prior to admission and enables service users to make an informed decision about their life. Visits made by prospective service users are regarded as an essential part of an initial assessment undertaken by appropriate staff employed in the home. The assessment process involves all parties interested in the service user’s wellbeing. Meaningful interaction between them establishes whether the home meets the need criteria of the service user. The process also identifies likely shortfalls in care delivery. The home uses the latter findings to determine projected care needs and probable training input, or whether further resources are needed to provide a good standard of care. Assessments on all the service users are regularly undertaken as part of the care package offered in this home. These can take a variety of forms. Much depends upon the presenting behaviour of the service user or changes identified in their care needs. Often assessments are attended by a variety of professionals who have an interest or input into the care planning through the assessment process. Invariably, the assessment is attended by the service user and a person representing their interests and rights. The assessment records demonstrated that a service user’s opinion and wishes were considered. In particular, a service user’s aspirations and wishes were noted and formed the basis for some care planning and a management strategy for care delivery. This could be tracked through the individual and personal records maintained on each of the service users. Once a prospective service user was identified as benefiting from the services provided by the home, a placement was planned. This was initiated by the home furnishing the service user with a written contract. A copy was also made available for the service user’s representative. The residential contract set out the rights and responsibilities of both parties. It also made conditions and terms of residence and the circumstances under which this might be terminated. This did not undermine the principles of criminal or civil legislation. From time to time, the contracts are reviewed and altered to keep pace with changing legislation; but more likely the review is for the placement fee increases. The latter is dealt with on an annual basis and involves the service users in the process. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 10 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 standard(s) 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Service users know that their personal goals are reflected in their individual plans and that potential risks are managed. They are also aware that their views are listened to and that their records will be kept as securely as possible. The nature by which the records are kept is not satisfactory and could compromise confidentiality. EVIDENCE: At the time of the inspection there were two residents in the home. The inspector was able to speak with both of them on an individual basis. One of the residents was particularly helpful towards the inspection process and the inspector was grateful for the amount of input they were able to provide. Some of the service users are acquainted with their personal records and often contribute to the content of them. Some of the service users are ambivalent about the records kept in the home on their behalf, and tend not to subscribe to their content. Despite this, when contributions are made on their behalf, they are made aware through the key worker system about the content of the information and whether this affects their home life. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 Information about individuals was easily obtained and appropriately indexed. Entries about individual service users were cross-referenced with other records where appropriate. These could be audited through the inspection process and referred back to the service user for verification. The records are kept in a secure cabinet, however there is no dedicated office area. The area used for the office is also earmarked on the home’s registration detail held by the Commission as communal day space. The nature of the space used, which is a conservatory, does not provide sufficient facility to ensure that confidentially can be maintained. The security of the space, where a number of classified records are kept, is questionable. Despite this sensitive records are kept in a locked steel cabinet. The home conducts a key worker system. The shortcomings of such a system are considered. This is particularly poignant when service users identify in an alternative staff member a natural rapport of interaction that benefits their progress and welfare. This is not over ridden by the key worker system. In such instances the key worker tends to become a secondary and in some instances a perfunctory role, although the worker remains fundamental to the basic care provision towards a service user. In this way, a service user is provided with a good degree of help and assistance to accomplish a meaningful identity and life within the home. This process is extended and complemented when the client group are empowered through a regularly held house / group meeting. The service users are encouraged to assert their decisions and control the day-to-day conduct of the home, thereby having influence upon most aspects of their life within the home. Service users being exposed to responsible risk is considered a natural extension of being able to live a meaningful and independent life in the home. Each of the service users are assessed for risk in all activities they undertake in the home, or when partaking in an external event. This is documented and where appropriate, incorporated in an individual’s care planning. The assessments are regularly reviewed, amended and monitored. The service users are conscious of risk and this is openly discussed with them to ensure they understand any limitations placed on their independence and lives. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 12 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 standard(s) 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17. The service users are able to take part and engage in age, peer, leisure and culturally appropriate activities. They have opportunities for personal development, some of which are through community experiences and integration. Their rights are appropriately respected and their responsibilities are recognised. The meals in this home are good. They offer service users independence, choice, variety and special diets. EVIDENCE: At the time of the inspection the home was accommodating six service users. Two of them were present during the whole of the visit. The remaining service users were either on holiday or attending a local day centre. It was a common occurrence for service users to be out of the house during the daytime attending work experiences, college courses or learning day centre environments. It was also an often event for service users to be undertaking other everyday pursuits, obligations and social interaction across a broad range of activities. These were either part of the planned care provided for individuals or were undertaken by service users as their choices and decisions about their life in the home. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 Part of the home’s ethos involved the service user in all aspects of the day-today chores. This meant that service users engaged in a number of domestic activities either on their own behalf or that of the resident group. This was undertaken with the discreet supervision of the care staff and the level of this involvement was determined by the service user’s assessed capabilities and care needs. All the activities undertaken by the service users are risk assessed. These are appropriately recorded and regularly reviewed. The service users interviewed by the inspector had a clear conception of their rights and understood that they should not be eroded through being in residential care. They spoke about the provision of care in the home. The views provided by the two residents seen by the inspector indicated that their rights where given paramount consideration by the care staff. At the time of the inspection a service user was preparing and cooking a meal for their consumption after having previously chosen and shopped for the ingredients. The records relating to the provision of food were examined. They revealed that meals were provided in enough variety to ensure each person received a balanced diet. When a service user needed a specialised diet, a separate record was maintained. Similarly, if a service user had a meal alternative to that provided on the menu record, this was recorded separately. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 14 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 standard(s) 18, 19 and20. The service users receive the personal support needed for their care. Their physical and emotional health needs are met. At the time of this inspection, none of the service users administered their own medication. EVIDENCE: The nature of the provision of care in the home and its stated purpose and function means that staff provide very little personal support. Where this is necessary it is minimal and tends to be guidance rather than physical input. Despite this the staff are appropriately trained to provide personal care should the needs arise. The staff in the home are very aware of the importance to mind a service user’s physical and emotional needs. This has been brought about by the nature of the current client group whose demands upon care staff time requires good emotional support together with associated skills, but in the main is from the leadership style of the manager. This ensures that staff are constantly using reflective practice into the manner by which they deliver care issues through management supervision and self-assessment. The physical needs of service users are effectively managed through a key worker system. The shortfalls of this system are taken into consideration and incorporated in the management strategy for care delivery. This means service Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 15 users have ready access to a range of medical and remedial services that look after their physical wellbeing. The records revealed that from time to time, the administration of medication was reviewed on a regular basis for each of the service users. This incorporated an assessment of their ability to self-administer their own medication. Decisions, along with the reasons, are properly recorded in the service user’s personal records. Where appropriate service users endorse that decision and are provided an opportunity to make written comments. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 16 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 standard(s) 22 and 23 The service users do feel that their views are considered and that they contribute to the conduct of the home. There are a number of resources used by the home to ensure that service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. EVIDENCE: At the time of the inspection there were no outstanding complaints recorded or being investigated. The records revealed that when complaints had been made they had been investigated and a report was made available to the person originally initiating it. The complaint procedure had three stages. This ensured that an adequate review of the findings could be reviewed separately and independent of each stage. The service users seen by the inspector where aware of the complaint systems in the home and one had had guidance from their key worker on the procedure that they were able to accurately verbally relate. The service users are confident that whenever they complain about aspects of their care or about the general conduct of their home, these are treated seriously. The abuse documentation collated by the manager are used as a policy and procedure in the home. They do not undermine a service user’s civil or criminal rights to make their own representation to appropriate authorities. The documents provide clear guidelines to the staff, visitors, representative and the service users about abuse issues. This is complemented by a complaint procedure and whistle blowing policy. All these documents are readily available to persons with an interest in the home. The staff regularly attend training programmes that address abuse issues and the protection of potentially vulnerable adults. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 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 standard(s) 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 30 The home provides a homely, comfortable and safe environment for the service users. This has been accomplished through recent investment into the cosmetic improvements throughout the home. Everyone accommodated in the home has his or her own bedroom. There are sufficient toilets and bathrooms to meet the presenting needs of all the residents. The shared areas in the home are compromised with staff needs and accommodation. There is appropriate special equipment to ensure service users’ independence is treated as paramount but this would be ineffective for persons with care needs associated with older people. The practices conducted in the home indicate that it is hygienic and clean. EVIDENCE: The home has recently undergone a significant refurbishment and redecoration in all the communal areas. This has been a considered exercise that provides a good standard of cosmetic décor and refurbishment that is welcoming, homely and comfortable. There are two communal areas in the home. These are an integral dining and living room. This tends to limit the space available for service users to undertake individual activities and the area is used for shared activities. The inspector established from the service users present at the time Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 of the inspection, that the age range of the client group means there is often contention within the group about shared activities in the communal area. There is an extension to the home that is a conservatory. It is provided as additional communal space, however it is usurped by the staff for administration purposes and office arrangements. Throughout the house there are items that enhance and adorn the rooms. These reflect the different personalities, characters, interests and cultures of the resident group. Similarly, the service users’ own rooms are decorated and arranged to reflect their choice. Each room indicates the identity of the occupant. This is achieved according to their interests, cultural identity, character or personality. The rooms used by the residents are sufficient for some of them to undertake a variety of indoor activities and interests in elected solitude and independence. There are two bathrooms with shower facilities in the house. These are appropriately placed to provide reasonable access to all the service users in relation to the location of their individual rooms. The facilities are appropriately equipped to maintain privacy and meet the presenting needs of the current resident group. There are four toilets in the home. These are strategically placed to provide good access for each of the service users in relation to their bedrooms. Some are equipped to meet the needs of persons with mobility problems. One service user in the home has mobility problems and has access to some of the facilities to enable a degree of independence with minimal interference or assistance from the care staff. The records relating to the indirect safety of the service users and visitors were examined. They indicated that health and safety aspects of the building were given regular attention. The records were up to date and accurate. A visual inspection of some of the safety facilities in the house revealed that the records were accurate. There were no staff employed to clean the home. There was an expectation that service users would contribute to this aspect of care in the home. This necessitated that cleaning was conducted according to a rota and this was supplemented by the care staff. The procedures of cleaning the home, and the regularity of this indicated that the home was as hygienic as could possible be accomplished. Overall, the home appeared clean and hygienic. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 19 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 35 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 and 36 The staff have clearly identified job descriptions that clarify their role and responsibility. The home ensures that the staff are competent and appropriately qualified to fulfil their roles and responsibilities. Part of the training ensures that the staff form part of an effective team. All of these issues currently support and benefit the service users, however the wide age range of the service users could start to challenge their competences. The home safeguards the service users’ welfare with appropriate procedures and policies on the selection and recruitment of appropriate staff. The presenting needs of the service users are identified and met with appropriately trained staff, however this is becoming compromised by the looked after age range and the likely needs of some of the older service users. The home conducts good support and supervision networks for the care staff. EVIDENCE: The home has established appropriate job descriptions for each job function in the home. These are interlinked but clearly define a role for each of the staff to identify and secure the responsibilities of this role. The service users were able to relate to the different roles and responsibilities of the staff because they were established in the ethos and regime in the home. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 The service users had formed their own communication systems relating to the staff roles with each of their responsibilities. This was an effective process and displayed the cohesive nature of the client group in the home reinforcing their expectations of the staff responsibilities along with their roles. The home has a good training programme for the care staff. This not only considers the statutory obligations for each staff member, but is enhanced enough to enable staff to undertake training in areas that relate to the different presenting needs of the service users. There are nine care staff employed in the home. Six of them were undertaking national vocational qualifications to level two. A further two staff were completing the vocational training to level three. Some of the staff were complementing this training with specific qualifications that relate to individual client needs. In principle, this meant that the home could cope with a wide range of care problems. The staff skill mix and their ability to interact with each other was seen by the inspector whilst observing aspects of the delivery of care to the service users. This seemed to meet the diversity of needs for the current service user group. Nevertheless, the wide age range of the service users, which is 25 to 65 years, did generally compromise staff skills and training. The diversity of current care needs is being met through the competencies of the staff team rather than any identified training. If the nature of this balance should shift and a service user’s needs be more associated with older people, it is doubtful that these could be comfortably undertaken competently by the staff having regard to their experience and skill mix. Similarly, the nature of the home and its stated purpose and function would not be appropriate to look after persons with care needs associated with older people. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 21 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 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 37, 40 and 42. The home is well run and is organised in the best interests of the service users. This is partly accomplished by the home’s policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of the service users is given paramount consideration in the conduct of the home and safeguards their welfare. EVIDENCE: The home has a good management regime and strategy that has been established following the appointment of the current registered manager. This is augmented and maintained through regular household/residents’ meetings. Through this process, the home benefits with contributions that affect the way things are run. It also helps to establish service users accountable for the nature of the conduct of the home and the management of themselves. In this way issues do not tend to be overlooked and conflate to form an overall culture of wellbeing and accomplishment. The outcome is that the home appears to run itself and this is generally appreciated by the service users. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 22 It also means that the input from the staff seems to be fairly low key and their interference into the service users’ everyday affairs minimal. Of course, this is not the case. The home’s ethos and regime is being conducted effectively and efficiently through its management systems. This tends to reduce confrontation and creates the effect of harmony from which everyone in the home benefits. The staff have a professional approach to their work and this is reflected in the delivery of care. The policies and procedures provide the staff with confidence to carry out their duties. The administration safeguards the service users and the staff by reinforcing good care practice. Most of the service users have some knowledge of the home’s working procedures. This particularly relates to making complaints, equality and discrimination. The records relating to the indirect health and safety of the service users were examined. They were well maintained and current. Monthly visits from responsible persons representing the registered persons ensure that health and safety issues are regularly addressed and attended. This actively promotes and protects the service users from irresponsible risk. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 23 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 3 3 x 3 3 Standard No 22 23 ENVIRONMENT Score 3 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 LIFESTYLES Score 3 3 3 3 2 Score Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 3 3 3 2 x 3 Standard No 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 3 3 3 3 x 3 3 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score 3 3 3 3 2 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Seymour House Score 3 3 3 x Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 x x 3 x 3 x H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 24 YES 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 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. 1. Refer to Standard 10 Good Practice Recommendations The nature of the office provision is not satisfactorily placed in an area designated for the communal space for service users. This could compromise confidentiality of records and conversations. It also raises issues of the security of records. The communal space allocated for the service users is impinged upon by the office being located in the same area. This reduces service users choice and privacy. The office needs to be accommodated elsewhere. The age range of the service users indicates that their care needs are diverse. This could start to compromise the skills and training of the staff as the care needs of the older service users become more demanding. 2. 28 3. 35 4. Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection 11th Floor International House Dover Place Ashford Kent TN23 1HU 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 Seymour House H56-H05 S56818 Seymour House V241679 110805 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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!