Inspection on 31/05/06 for Silverdale Residential Home

This inspection was carried out on 31st May 2006.

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 no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 4 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Silverdale Residential Home 06/08/08

Silverdale Residential Home 08/08/07

Silverdale Residential Home 09/12/05

Silverdale Residential Home 01/06/05

Silverdale Residential Home 01/12/04

Silverdale Residential Home 30/06/04

Silverdale Residential Home 30/10/03

Similar services:

Coopers Mill Ltd

Bramley Avenue (73)

Paradise Lodge

Grangewood

Upaya Ananda

Newton Court (1-2)

Kings Lane (32)

Pemdale

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Silverdale Residential Home 8 Buregate Road Felixstowe Suffolk IP11 2DE Lead Inspector John Goodship Key Unannounced Inspection 31st May 2006 10:00 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for 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. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Silverdale Residential Home Address 8 Buregate Road Felixstowe Suffolk IP11 2DE 01394 278424 01394 278424 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) Mr David Austin Mr David Austin Care Home 8 Category(ies) of Learning disability (8), Learning disability over registration, with number 65 years of age (8) of places DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 9th December 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Silverdale is a privately owned care home registered to provide personal care and accommodation to up to 8 service users with a learning disability, some of whom are over the age of 65. It is owned and managed by Mr & Mrs Austin, who operate with a family ethos and whose son is also involved in the administration and maintenance of the home. The home is situated in a residential area of Felixstowe town, close to the sea front and the town centre, where there are amenities such as shops, pubs and churches. The building is a three-storey Victorian terrace with a small front and back garden and onstreet parking. There are 2 single and 3 double bedrooms at present, although there are plans to increase the number of single rooms as vacancies occur. Only 1 single bedroom has an en suite toilet and shower facility. Stannah stair lifts give access to all three floors. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This visit was a key inspection under the Commission’s new inspection arrangements “Inspecting for Better Lives”. Evidence was gathered on the key standards, as well as many of the others. There were two carers on duty with the five current residents. The inspector was able to talk to two residents who were eager to tell the inspector about their lives, and comment on how comfortable they were living at Silverdale. The inspector was able to observe how these and the other residents interacted with each other and with the staff. One resident was asleep in the chair in their room. Three residents returned questionnaires and their comments have been included in the report. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 Staff must receive training in adult protection as soon as possible. Refresher sessions must be arranged at appropriate intervals. The wishes of residents regarding holidays must be respected, as far as their abilities allow. The quantity of medication given to residents must tally with the amount in stock. The registered person must inform the Commission immediately a resident dies. 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. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 1,2,3,4,5. Quality in this outcome area is good. Although there are few changes to the residents, the home has the procedure in place to allow any new resident to test out the home, and for the other residents to get to know out the newcomer. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: No new residents have been admitted since September 2004, but the procedures for doing so were in place. There had been two vacancies in the home for some time, and a third was added recently following the death of a resident. A prospective candidate for one of these vacancies was being considered and had been to visit the home the previous week. One of the residents was looking forward to being joined by another resident of the same gender. These standards have been met over the previous three inspections. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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): 6,7,8,9. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents are fully involved in deciding how to live their lives. They can participate as much as they wish or are able in the day to day running of the home. The taking of risks is planned and assessed, to allow residents to become more independent and responsible. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Care plans for all five current residents showed that they were regularly reviewed every month by the home, and once a year with the social worker. Two residents had had their annual review that month. No changes to their care plans or other aspects of their daily lives were required. There was a summary sheet as the front page of the plans, which acted as the handover summary. It highlighted any matters which staff needed to refer to in the main care plan. Plans covered health and social needs, and contained relevant risk assessments eg going out with minimal support for a walk. A resident whose care plan was case-tracked was able to speak about their perception of their behaviour, and what caused them to be agitated. One trigger was not getting a drink when they wanted one. These trigger points were noted in the care plan, with guidance to staff on preventing and deDS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 escalating any episodes. This resident said that sometimes they had to wait for their drink “but the staff will always tell me why.” With two of the residents being over 65, the staff were aware of their changing needs. These were captured at the monthly reviews, and included changes in medication and the need for specialist equipment. From observation there was a friendly interaction between staff and residents, with residents able to choose how they spent their time. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 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): 11,12,13,14,15,16,17. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents have opportunities for leisure and social activities to suit their choice and abilities. Residents should be offered the opportunity to take a holiday outside the home if they wish. Residents are offered a healthy diet which they help to choose. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The two oldest residents did not have a regular programme of outside day care or other activities outside the home, because of their frailty and lack of mobility. They were encouraged to do suitable activities with staff support, such as craft work, and staff took them out in wheelchairs when the weather, and their health, were appropriate. Other residents had maintained the pattern of daytime activities reported at the last inspection. One resident attended a day centre on Fridays, and went to church on Sundays. They also liked to go to the local pub at the end of the road, sometimes on their own. The landlord was happy to keep an eye on them, and the staff had supported the resident to control their drinking. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 Another resident was no longer attending their day centre as the day service felt they were unable to meet their needs. However the resident was able, with some support, to cross the road, to go out by themselves, and liked to walk along the promenade. A risk assessment for this activity was filed in the care plan. This resident appeared active and full of energy. They were attending an aqua aerobics class at the nearby swimming pool. The other resident attended a day centre three days a week in the locality. This person was not able to go out on their own as they had a limited knowledge of road safety, so staff always accompanied them. One resident said that they liked colouring and drawing, walks to the beach, and playing games in the lounge. Some residents helped with domestic tasks in the house, especially in keeping their own rooms clean and tidy. Only one resident had regular contact with their close family. All the residents appeared to have good relationships with the staff which encouraged the family ethos in the home. There were no plans to take any of the residents on holiday although one had told the inspector where they would like to go. Meals were prepared by the staff who had all taken the local council Food Hygiene certificate. The kitchen was refurbished last year and is clean and hygienic. Sometimes residents can assist staff under their supervision. The main meal is in the evening and was being prepared during the inspection. Staff were aware of the preferences of the residents. All food in the fridges was dated if opened, and daily temperature checks were recorded. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 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): 18,19,20,21. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents are monitored closely to make sure their physical and emotional needs are met, particularly as they get older. The training of staff in the safe administration of medication protects residents from harm. The discrepancies described are not sufficient to make the service unsafe. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: A check of the medication administration records showed that one tablet of aspirin signed as given that day was still in the blister pack. For the same resident, five sachets of Movicol had been signed as given but this did not tally with the number remaining in the box, which appeared to show that only four had been given. The person responsible for medication was asked to investigate and report the outcome to the Commission. All other aspects of the administration of medicines were in line with recommended good practice. Training certificates for staff on the safe administration of medicines were available. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 Only one elderly resident needed hoisting at the time of the inspection. Three staff had received hoist training from the maintenance contractor the day prior to the inspection. The death of a resident some weeks previously had not seemed to affect the residents according to a carer, apart from one of the residents who had cried at the time. The niece of the deceased resident still visited the home to see the residents. One resident had been in hospital for a week to resolve a bowel problem. This was successful and they were visited regularly by the District Nurse. One resident also saw the chiropodist regularly and this was recorded. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 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): 22,23. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. The home must demonstrate through its training programme that residents are protected from abuse. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: There had been no complaints since the last inspection, either to the home or to the Commission. The policy on the protection of vulnerable adults was up-to-date, with appropriate instructions for staff on action to be taken. A member of staff when questioned was able to identify potential situations which could lead to abuse, particularly in relation to the behaviour of one resident, and knew to whom any allegations should be reported. However, there had been no recorded training for staff in the prevention, recognition and handling of the abuse of vulnerable adults in the previous twelve months. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 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): 24,25, 26,30. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents are supported to treat the home as their own, personalising their rooms and contributing to the homeliness and comfort of the home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The owners had plans, with planning approval, to extend the house at the rear, partly to provide another single bedroom. There would then be the opportunity to alter the existing office and sleep-in rooms to provide further single bedrooms. The aim would be to eliminate the shared rooms, when vacancies occurred or when residents chose to change. This project had been temporarily put on hold until more vacancies were filled. Rooms were highly personalised by décor and equipment. Residents were supported to keep their rooms clean, and as tidy as they wished. There was a stair lift to both upper floors, and 2 variable height beds were in use to meet the care needs of the older residents. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 Communal rooms were comfortably furnished. The kitchen had benefited from a refurbishment last year and was clean and hygienic. There had been an Environmental Health inspection in the previous year which found everything to be in order. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 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): 32,33,34,35,36. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. Residents are supported by staff who are properly and safely recruited, and supervised. However residents will be better protected when staff have received formal training in adult protection. Residents have good support from staff at the level appropriate to their ability, to enable them to make choices about what they do. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Evidence was seen of the Certificates in Food Hygiene which three staff had completed in December 2005. All staff were now certificated in this subject. The hoist maintenance contractor had also done refresher hoist training the day before the inspection. Two staff had completed NVQ Level 2. Staff were seen to provide good support to residents in doing everyday tasks. One resident made a cup of tea in the kitchen, under supervision. Other staff were seen to interact well with residents. Two residents said that they liked all the staff and got on well with them. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 There were no new members of staff since the last inspection. At that time, all required checks and documentation were in personal files. A member of staff confirmed that regular supervision sessions were being held. It has been noted under Standard 23 that updating training in adult protection had not been held within the last twelve months. The number of staff on duty was appropriate for the needs of the residents. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 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): 37,38,41,42,43. Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents benefit from the homely and family feel of the home, with the close involvement of the owners in meeting residents’ needs. Residents are protected by the health and safety procedures of the home, but will be better protected when staff have received formal training in adult protection. The home must meet the requirements of Regulation 37 regarding the reporting of deaths and serious incidents. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The family who owned the home gave a significant commitment to the running of the home and the care of its residents. The registered manager was spending less time in direct management of the home. This was being taken on by his wife managing the care, and his son managing the administration of the home. The latter had almost completed his NVQ Level 4 in Care and Management. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 Although the home had carried two vacancies for over a year, one of the owners said later that this had not put the home’s financial situation in jeopardy. She said that they were finding it difficult to source referrals of people with a suitable level of ability to fit in with some of the other residents in the home. The home had not informed the Commission of the death of a resident four weeks prior to the inspection. It was noted that the hoist had recently been maintained. Refresher training on the use of the hoist had taken place on the day before the inspection. DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 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 Standard No Score 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 2 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 3 26 3 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 X STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 2 33 3 34 3 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 3 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 3 13 3 14 2 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 2 3 3 3 X X 2 2 3 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 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 YA14 YA20 YA23 Regulation 16(2)(n) 13(2) 13(6) Requirement Timescale for action 30/06/06 4 YA41 37(1)(a) The registered person must consult service users about their wishes regarding holidays. The registered person must 22/06/06 ensure that the medication dispensed is accurately recorded. The registered person must 22/06/06 make arrangements for the training of staff in the prevention of harm or abuse to service users. The registered person must give 31/05/06 notice to the Commission without delay of the death of any service user. 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 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection Suffolk Area Office St Vincent House Cutler Street Ipswich Suffolk IP1 1UQ 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 DS0000024488.V294440.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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!