Inspection on 07/06/05 for Spring Cottages

This inspection was carried out on 7th June 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 there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Spring Cottages 27/04/06

Spring Cottages 30/11/05

Spring Cottages 14/12/04

Spring Cottages 02/06/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE SPRING COTTAGES Stone Moor Bottom St Johns Road PADIHAM BB12 7BW Lead Inspector Pat White Announced The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Spring Cottages Address 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) Stone Moor Bottom St Johns Road Padiham Burnley Lancashire BB12 0TA 01282 771601 01282 773642 Mrs Carol Mary Leggett Mrs Nadine Phillips CRH 23 Category(ies) of Old age not falling within any other category registration, with number (OP) 22 of places Dementia over 65 years (DE) 1 named person SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: The service should, at all times, employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection The service is registered to provide personal care for a maximum of 23 service users A maximum of 22 (twenty two)service users who fall into the category of OP (Older People) 1 (one) named service user who falls into the category of DE(E). A variation application must be submitted to the CSCI to remove this category when this person no longer resides in the home. Date of last inspection 14 December 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Spring Cottages was registered to provide personal care and accommodation for 22 older people and one older person with dementia. The premises are a detached, older type house with a new extension. It is situated in a semi rural area. There were ample parking facilities at the front of the building and attractive garden areas on either side of the property, which were used by the service users in fine weather. The home is a two-storey building; the two floors being linked by two chair lifts. There were 17 single bedrooms, 11 of which had an en - suite facility, and 3 double rooms. Communal space consisted of 2 lounges, two dining areas and a conservatory. All were smoke free. There were 3 bathrooms, two with assisted bath equipment. Activities and social events included entertainers, films and board games. Staff escorted individuals and groups on trips out. The registered manager of the home was Mrs Nadine Phillips, who had achieved the Registered Managers Award and had worked in a managerial position since 1999. There was also a deputy manager in post. Mr and Mrs Leggett, the owners of the home, were also involved in the day - to day running of the establishment. Mrs Leggett was the registered person and responsible individual of the home. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was an announced inspection, the purpose of which was to assess important areas of life in the home that should be inspected over a 12 month period, check the progress of previous legal requirements and good practice recommendations, and check other matters in the home which came to the inspector’s notice. The inspection took 11 hours, 30 minutes and comprised of, talking to residents, a partial tour of the premises, looking at resident’s care records and other documents, and discussion with the manager, the owner and 2 members of staff. Seven residents were spoken with and others were observed in their routine daily activities. Fifteen residents and two general practitioners completed comment cards. What the service does well: The admission procedures were thorough and the assessments of peoples’ needs were detailed and comprehensive. This enabled the home and prospective residents to determine whether or not the home could meet their needs. The manager notified prospective residents in writing of the result of the assessment. Residents described most staff as caring and kind and stated that they felt well cared for and well treated. Comments like “they will do any thing for you” were made. Most residents said they “liked living in the home”. The home provided a good variety of leisure activities and options for recreation. The food served was appetising and wholesome and the residents benefited from having a choice of two main courses and desserts at lunch time each day and choice of cooked breakfast. Most residents stated that they enjoyed the food. The home provided attractive and well - maintained gardens and outdoor space for the use of residents, who stated that they enjoyed these. The home is a family run business, and there is continuity of management from competent and experienced people. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 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. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1, 3 & 4. Standard 6 was not applicable. Useful information is provided about the home and this assisted the prospective residents and relatives to make a choice. The home’s admission procedures, including pre admission assessments, helped to determine whether or not prospective residents’ needs could be met. EVIDENCE: The Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide had been reviewed and updated. These gave prospective residents and relatives useful information about the services and facilities at Spring Cottages. The Service User Guide should state the telephone number of the CSCI, contain information about how to contact the local Social Services Department and the Health Authority and include residents’ views of the home. Service User Guides were in the residents’ rooms and a visiting relative confirmed that she had a copy of this document. The residents’ files viewed showed that the manager had carried out pre admission assessments with some residents, and which complied with standard 3.3. Social work assessments were also carried out for those residents who were admitted under care management arrangements. Following her SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 assessment the manager had confirmed in writing that the home could meet the residents’ needs. The assessments continued on admission and were seen to be detailed and comprehensive. Residents had wide ranging needs from those with varying degrees of confusion and memory loss associated with dementia and old age to those who were relatively independent. One resident was able to go out alone. There was evidence that the wide range of residents’ needs were being met. All residents who completed comment cards stated that they felt well cared for and that staff treated them well. Two residents who was spoken with stated that there should be more freedom to exercise individual choice (see next section) One relative spoken with stated that she felt her mother’s needs were well met at Spring Cottages and that staff were approachable and kind. They had helped her mother settle in and “nothing was too much trouble”. She also commented on the prompt attention given to residents by staff. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7, 8, 9 & 10 There was a comprehensive care plan system for recording the health, personal and social care needs of the residents. This process could be further improved by the recording of more information and more frequent reviewing. Residents’ health care was monitored and promoted, and to further enhance this some aspects of medication management need to be improved. EVIDENCE: All residents had a comprehensive care plan and some aspects of the recording of resident’ needs and plan of care had improved since the previous inspection. There were risk assessments relating to falls and mobility, and some preferences for the residents’ daily routines were recorded. The care plans could be further improved by the recording of more of these preferences, and the implication for care, and the transferring of more relevant information from the assessment to the care plan. Examples of this were discussed with the manager. The care plans were being reviewed every few months. It is recommended that they be reviewed at least every month and the care plan up dated accordingly. The residents’ files viewed showed that their health was monitored and promoted and that they had access to all necessary health care facilities. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 The Page 11 care given by staff for those vulnerable to pressure sores was detailed on the care plan. Equipment for pressure areas was provided to a number of residents by the district nursing team and through the home’s own funds. The assessment and care plans detailed residents’ continence needs. There was evidence that the residents’ mental health was monitored and appropriate intervention sought. There was information about diet and meals on the care plan but nutritional screening had not been undertaken. Residents were seen moving freely around the home. Medication management and administration was carried out to ensure the well - being and the safety of the residents. However this must be improved in the following ways: The criteria for PRN (“when required”) and variable dose medication must be clearly defined and documented. The home’s monitoring and checking systems must be improved to eliminate errors in administration and must include, the home checking the prescriptions from the GP prior to dispensing, the person in charge of medication ensuring that the instructions on the MAR sheets are identical to those on the medication labels and ensuring that medication prescribed to one resident is never given to another resident. A number of good practice recommendations have also been made. Residents’ rights to privacy and dignity were respected. Staff were seen being respectful and kind to residents, and in discussion with the inspector demonstrated an understanding and knowledge about the importance of these matters. All residents who were spoken with, and all who completed comment cards, stated that staff treated them appropriately and respected their right to privacy. The 2 General Practitioners who completed comment cards stated that they felt the home managed their patient’s health care appropriately, and that staff were cooperative, competent and able to deal with residents’ health care issues and problems. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13, 14 & 15 Residents had choices in some areas of their lives, but some residents felt there should be more choice. There were activities that appeared to meet the interests of residents, and the visiting arrangements encouraged and enabled residents to maintain contact with family and friends. The food served was appetising, wholesome, enjoyed by most residents and afforded them choices. EVIDENCE: Some routines of daily living were flexible to suit individual preferences. For example residents had choices of leisure activities and food served. Staff stated that residents could get up and go to bed at a time of their choosing, but one resident stated that all residents were woken at around 6.0am. Interests and hobbies were recorded on the care plan and there was evidence that these interests were encouraged. For example one resident enjoyed working in the garden and another was encouraged to follow his hobby of horse racing. Leisure activities in the home included film shows, “sing a longs”, “exercise to music” and handicrafts. Activities were discussed at resident’s meetings and weekly activities were posted on doors. Of the 15 residents who completed comment cards 12 stated that suitable activities were provided, two said they were not and one said they “sometimes” were. Visitors were welcome in the home at any reasonable time. One visitor was spoken with and confirmed that she could visit at any time, and that communication was good between the staff and herself. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 Staff spoken with appeared to recognise the importance of choice for residents, and there was choice in matters such as food eaten and leisure activities. However some residents stated that they wished they could have more freedom in their daily lives. Three residents stated on the comment cards that they would like more say in the way the home is run. It is recommended that the registered person re - assess, with individuals, the possibilities for greater choice and freedom within a risk assessment framework. The food served appeared appetising, of good quality and proportions. Residents benefited from a choice of two main cooked dishes and desserts at lunch - time. In addition the cook catered for individual tastes and there was the option of a cooked breakfast. The dining room provided a pleasant eating area. Appropriate assistance was given to those who required it. Some residents spoken with stated that the food was “good”, others said it was “sometimes good”. Of the residents who completed comment cards 11 said they “liked the food” and 4 said they “sometimes” did. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 & 18 There was a simple and clear complaints procedure accessible to residents and relatives in the service user guide. The home had appropriate policies and procedures to protect the residents from abuse. EVIDENCE: The home had a simple and clear complaints procedure. There were copies of this in the service user guide. However this must state what action will be taken and in what time scale, and that people can contact the CSCI directly at any time with concerns and complaints. A relative spoken with stated that she had seen a copy of the complaints procedure but had not had cause to make a complaint. Most residents stated on the comment cards that they knew who to speak to if they were unhappy with any aspect of life in the home. No complaints had been made to the CSCI since the previous inspection and no complaints had been recorded in the home’s “complaints book”. Everyday concerns were not recorded but dealt with immediately. There were policies and procedures to protect the residents from abuse and which complied with the relevant guidance. There had been no suspicions or allegations of abuse since the previous inspection. All residents stated on the comment cards that they felt safe living in the home. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19, 20, 24 & 26 Spring Cottages provided pleasant and clean accommodation that suited the residents’ needs. Residents were satisfied with their private accommodation. There was sufficient indoor and outside communal space, and the gardens provided attractive areas for the residents to enjoy. EVIDENCE: The premises were well maintained and decorated and certain areas of the home had been improved since the previous inspection. For example two bedrooms, the dining room and one of the lounges had been decorated. Bedrooms were decorated as required and when they become vacant. There were attractive and well maintained gardens on both sides of the house. There was sufficient communal space consisting of two lounges, a conservatory and a two - part dining room, all of which were smoke free. All these areas were bright, pleasantly decorated and furnished. There was ample outdoor space around the home, and the well - kept gardens were a pleasant area for residents to walk and sit. Some residents spoke of their appreciation of this. The registered person was to enclose the garden SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 pond to ensure the safety of the residents. The CSCI must be informed of the progress of this work by the date stated. The bedrooms were furnished, decorated and equipped for the comfort of the residents, and residents had brought small items of furniture with them. Some bedroom floors had attractive wooden floors to ensure a good standard of cleanliness and hygiene. Bedrooms were redecorated as they become vacant. A few bedrooms would benefit from minor restoration work to the wallpaper and paintwork and the minor repairs identified at the time of the inspection, including a call bell to be replaced in one of the bedrooms. Residents spoken with were complimentary about the accommodation. The home was clean and fresh at the time of the inspection with appropriate laundry systems in place for the control of infection. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27, 28, 29 & 30 The home had sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of the residents and the staff training programme was being developed according to the needs of the residents and staff. However the home’s staff recruitment policies and procedures did not meet statutory requirements nor do they protect residents. EVIDENCE: Rotas supplied, and the other inspection methods used, indicated that the staffing levels were appropriate for meeting the needs of the residents. When the registered manager and registered provider where in the home there was sufficient staff to organise and supervise activities. Over 50 of the care staff were trained to NVQ level 2 and above. Members of staff had undertaken training in moving and handling, dementia, infection control and safe handling of medicines. New members of staff undertake the home’s induction training. There were plans to purchase a training package which would provide induction training material in accordance with the Skills for Care (the former TOPSS) specifications. The staff records showed that the home’s recruitment policies and procedures were not in accordance with the Care Home’s Regulations and therefore did not support the protection of residents. Staff had commenced work prior to the receipt of CRB/POVA checks. For the most recently recruited member of staff, who commenced work in March, these checks were still outstanding. There was no written evidence of the CRB/POVA application and the problems SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 described with the CRB. Also there was only one written reference for this person and which was not satisfactory. The registered persons need to ensure that their recruitment practices are robust and protect residents from the risk of unsuitable staff being employed. The Commission will take enforcement action if these matters are not attended to with the required degree of urgency. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 33, 35 & 38 The home was managed and run by competent and experienced people. The residents’ finances were safeguarded by the management systems. However the quality monitoring systems and some of the safety aspects of the home could be further improved EVIDENCE: A formal service quality monitoring exercise had been conducted in 2004, and residents were involved in some aspects of the running of the home. Residents meetings were held every few months. Residents were informed of the inspection and encouraged to speak to the inspector. Of the residents who completed comment cards, 12 said they did not wish to be more involved in the running of the home and 3 said that they did. Records of residents’ finances showed that their financial interests were safeguarded. Residents and relatives managed the finances if at all possible. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 The registered person managed the finances of one resident and detailed and accurate records were kept. The registered person ensured a safe environment and safe working practices for the benefit of residents and staff. Gas and electrical installations had been serviced appropriately, as had the fire equipment, the stair lift and the bath hoists. However there was no evidence of portable electrical appliance testing. The safety aspects of the home could be further enhanced by, more frequent fire drills and measures to protect residents from the hazards of hot water at outlets not yet fitted with pre set valves that ensure water distribution close to 43 degrees. Water temperatures at these outlets were close to 60 degrees and detailed risk assessments on individual residents were still outstanding from previous inspections. Also there was no evidence that the two most recently appointed members of staff had undertaken fire precaution training. SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 2 x 3 3 x N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 2 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 2 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 3 x x x 2 x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 1 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 2 x 3 x x 2 x 3 x x 2 SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 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 9 Regulation 13 (2) Requirement The criteria for the administration of PRN and variable dose medication must be clearly defined and documented with the MAR sheets (Previous 2 timescales not met) The registered person must ensure that the instructions on the MAR sheets are identical to those on the medication labels at all times, so that the correct dose is given. The registered person must ensure that the prescriptions are seen by the the home prior to dispensing. Medication prescribed for one resident, including Gaviscon, must not be given to another resident. When eye drops are prescribed a separate supply for each eye must be obtained to prevent cross infection. The complaints procedure must state what action will be taken and in what timescale and that the CSCI can be contacted at any time. The registered person must ensure that the garden pond is Timescale for action 30 June 2005 2. 9 13 (2) Immediate from the time of the inspection 30 June 2005 Immediate form the time of the inspection. Immediate from the receipt of the report. 30 June 2005 3. 9 13 (2) 4. 9 13 (2) 5. 9 13 (2) 6. 16 22 (4) & (6) (b) 7. 19 13 (4)(a) 30 June 2005 Page 23 SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 8. 9. 24 29 23 (2)(n) 19 (1)(b), schedule 2 10. 38 13 (4) (a) & (c) 13 (4) (a) & (c) 11. 38 12. 38 23 (4) (d) & (e) made safe and notify the CSCI of when this work is complete. The registered person must ensure that there is a call bell in the bedroom identified The registered person must ensure that the homes recruitment procedures are fully in accordance with the Care Homes (Amended) Regulations, including not commencing work until CRB/POVA checks and two references from former employers are obtained. (Previous 2 timescales not met) The registered person must ensure that evidence of portable appliance testing is supplied to the CSCI The registered person must ensure that the residents are safe from the hazards of hot water ( Two previous timescales not met) Fire drills must be held more frequently, and there must be records to show that all new members of staff undertake appropriate fire precaution training. 30 June 2005 30 June 2005 30 June 2005 31 July 2005 Immediate from the receipt of the report. 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 1 Good Practice Recommendations The Service User Guide should state the telephone number of the CSCI, contain information about how to contact the local Social Services Department and the Health Authority and residents’ views of the home. Care plans should contain all relevant information relating to residents preferred routines and care needs. Care plans should be reviewed at least once a months and all relevant updates transferred to the care plan. DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 24 2. 3. 7 7 SPRING COTTAGES 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 9 9 9 9 9 9 14 A MAR sheet should be kept for those residents who administer their own medication, including creams. It is recommended that the keys to medication storage are kept on a separate key ring It is recommended that a medication profile is verified for all residents on admission, including those having respite care, and updated as necessary. It is recommended that the registered person prompts 6 monthly medication reviews with GPs for residents who are aged 75 and above and prescribed 4 or more medicines. It is recommended the oxygen cylinder in use is stored on a trolley or chained. It is recommended that medication stored in the fridge is stored in a lockable facility. It is recommended that the registered person reassesses, with individuals, the possibilities for greater choice and freedom within a risk assessment framework. It is strongly recommended that the home keeps detailed records tracking CRB/POVA and reference applications, and documents all contact with the said agencies and personnel. The home should ensure that the staff induction training is in accordance with the Skills for Care specifications. 11. 29 12. 30 SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Unit 4, Petre Road Clayton Business Park Accrington Lancashire BB5 5JB 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 SPRING COTTAGES DF57_F57 S9483 SpringCottages V222105 070605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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!