Inspection on 21/07/05 for St John`s Wood Care Centre

This inspection was carried out on 21st July 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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

St John`s Wood Care Centre 30/07/08

St John`s Wood Care Centre 03/08/07

St John`s Wood Care Centre 11/05/06

St John`s Wood Care Centre 29/11/05

St John`s Wood Care Centre 20/01/05

St John`s Wood Care Centre 26/04/04

St John`s Wood Care Centre 22/05/03

Similar services:

Ashlong House

Henry Nihill House

Birchwood

The Infirmary

Orchard House Nursing Home

St Josephs Rest Home

Red Court Nursing Home

Spinney (The)

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE St Johns Wood Care Centre 48 Boundary Road London NW8 0HJ Lead Inspector Franki Solomon Announced 21 July 2005 10:00am st 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. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service St. Johns Wood Care Centre Address 48 Boundary Road London NW8 0HJ 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 7644 2930 020 7644 2940 Lifestyle Care PLC Ms Pamela Jane Brown Care Home 100 Category(ies) of OP Old Age (86) PD Physical Disability (14) registration, with number of places St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: For the provision of General Nursing Care for up to 86 people aged 60 and over. For the provision of General Nursing Care for up to 14 young people aged 18 to 65 years with physical disabilities (No more than 6 beds to be usedn this Unit for people over 60. People over 60 placed in this Unit should be mentally alert and produce a written letter or equivalent not to be placed in the Frail elderly unit The staffing Notice Date of last inspection 20th January 2005. Brief Description of the Service: St Johns Wood Care Centre is a registered care home providing 24-hour support and nursing by registered nursing staff and trained carers. . The home is owned by Lifestyle Care who are established in the development and management of Nursing homes and is the Registered Provider for St Johns Wood Care Centre. . St Johns Wood Care Centre is purpose built and was first registered in February 2001. The home povides nursing care to up to 100 residents. The home is situated in a prime residential area approximately ten minutes walk to local amenities and public transport. . The home is set out as follows: * Lower Ground Floor - up to 14 Younger Adults (18 - 65yrs) with physical disabilities - YPD Unit (Nursing). * Ground Floor - up to 23 Older People (OP) Nursing Care. *First Floor - up to 27 Older People - Nursing Care. This includes one double bedroom for a couple, but used as a single room only. *Second Floor - up to 18 Older People - Nursing Care. * Third Floor - up to 16 Older People - Nursing Care. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was St John’s Wood Care Centre’s first statutory inspection for the year beginning 1st April 2005 – 30 March 2006. The inspection was announced. The inspection took place over one day and lasted from 10.00 a.m. until 6.30 p.m. The inspector was met and assisted by the Registered Manager, Deputy Manager (Head of Care) and the Visiting Residential Advisor. The inspection was spent checking on whether previous Requirements made by the Commission had been met by the Registered Manager, checking that the home had the relevant policies and procedures for the running of the home, examining files of Service Users and Staff, talking to Service Users and observing staff with service users. The inspector did a tour of the building to see whether maintenance was undertaken and that the home was being run to ensure the safety of Service Users. The inspector was accompanied by the Deputy who left the Inspector to speak with Service Users in private. The arrangements for documents, files and records were satisfactory. Residents spoken to said they were happy and had no complaints. The home was smart and clean. The kitchen was spotless. Feedback was given throughout the inspection and at the end of the inspection. The home took a positive approach to the findings on the inspection reports and was responsive to making improvements. The inspector would like to thank Service Users and Staff for their co-operation and hospitality. What the service does well: The home’s Assessments, Care Plans and record keeping arrangements were clear and well done. This enabled staff a clear handover. Staff said the Manager and Deputy Manager were approachable. The management style enabled staff to ask questions and treat the residents appropriately. The St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 6 Deputy who supervised the Nursing staff was well informed of all residents’ needs and was observed to have a good interaction with staff and residents. Residents were complimentary of the care they received. The staff who were interviewed appeared highly motivated and keen to provide a warm, caring and professional standard of care to service users. The home’s training schedule indicated the home’s commitment to have a welltrained staff team. Staff expressed their satisfaction with the home’s training. The food was appetising and the kitchen was spotless. The kitchen assistants were interviewed. They were friendly and helpful. The atmosphere amongst Chef’s staff indicated a good working relationship. The home had been advised they were to implement a new procedure for disposal of unused medication. The Registered Manager had ensured that a full consultation had been undertaken to ensure safety. The Registered Manager & Deputy (Head of Care) undertake unannounced inspections at night to ensure night staff are alert and ensure the safe service delivery to service users. What has improved since the last inspection? Following a Pharmacist Inspection from the Commission, the Registered Manager had had a meeting with her senior team and the outcome was that the home’s pharmacist had been invited to feedback the Commission’s findings. The home had implemented training for staff concerning the administration of medication, they had revised their recording and followed the advice given. The home had bought more linen, and an order for further stocks of linen had been seen by the inspector. The home’s safety procedures had been tightened up, in that soaps and paper towels were in place at all washbasins, all appropriate bins for waste were in place, equipment was stored appropriately. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 7 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. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) . 3 & 6. The assessment process for prospective service users is appropriately managed and visits to the home are planned in accordance with individual needs. Standard 6 was not inspected since the home does not offer intermediate care. EVIDENCE: A sample of Service User care plans was inspected on each floor. They were found to contain an appropriate assessment of needs and risk assessment which was obtained prior to each service user moving into the home. When the inspector asked some of the residents about their assessment, they were not too certain what the inspector meant. When explained, they agreed they had been “assessed”. The service user care plan for some older people was signed by their relative. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7,8, 9, 10 & 11. There was a clear and consistent care planning system in place to adequately provide staff with the information they needed to satisfactorily meet service users’ needs. Service users were given the opportunity to take responsibility where appropriate and were treated with respect. A new system for disposing of unused medication was being implemented. EVIDENCE: Individual Service User Care Plans were in place. A sample of care plans were checked on each floor. These demonstrated appropriate arrangements in respect of care needs, a plan of action to meet each identified need and evaluation and review of the care provided. Where residents could not sign off their own Care Plans, their relatives did so. Care Plans seen demonstrated that residents had regular visits from the G.Ps from their local Group Practice, Dieticians, Continence Adviser and Tissue Viability Nurse. Records of visiting Health professional were observed on Care Plans. A risk assessment had been undertaken and no residents administered their own medication. The Head of Care, who was a Registered Nurse, informed the St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 11 inspector that since the Pharmacists visit, and in consultation with the pharmacist, the home had revised the method in which medication was administered and recorded on charts. Medication was administered by qualified nurses or trained staff only. The inspector examined the Medication Administration Records (MAR). The arrangements for the administration and recording of medication were in place. The inspector saw the minutes of the Pharmacy meeting of the 13th May 2005 which indicated the action that would be taken. These had since been implemented. The Induction programme seen for Medication Administration had not been signed off by the Trainer, nor had it been dated. This has also been noted under Standard 30 (training). A requirement has been made. As required at the last inspection, the home had signed consent from service users or their relatives when they assess the need for photographic records for wound treatment. When the inspector spoke with residents they said they were well treated and felt respected. The Registered Manager had received notification from their local pharmacist advising that they would no longer be taking unused medication. The disposal of medication would be the responsibility of the home. They received a specific yellow rubber sealed container with instructions. The dissolved solution was collected once per week. The Registered Manager had called a meeting to undertake a risk assessment on method and storage and collection of the container. It was agreed three people would be involved in the signing off of this task. A Staff Nurse, a member of the Management team and another staff member. The inspector examined the home’s policy and procedure on Death & Dying which indicated that in those events the resident would be treated with sensitivity and respect. The inspector examined the Service User file of a resident who had passed away. The records indicated respect and dignity were observed, although the words used in the write up could be improved. A recommendation has been made. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13, 14 & 15. Service Users were able to maintain contact with relatives and friends who were made to feel welcome. Staff knew the residents’ likes and dislikes and they were able to exercise choice and control. EVIDENCE: The home had a Visitors Book which visitors signed when visiting. Visitors were seen being welcomed during inspection. Visitors generally saw the resident in their room. Likes and dislikes were recorded as part of the Service Users Care Plan. Many of the residents had high care needs and preferred to remain in their room. Some were watching television. When the inspector asked whether they would like to do something else they were clear that they were comfortable as they were. The inspector saw several people on the Lower Ground Floor, some were unable to leave their bed and did not want to be disturbed. One resident was in a wheelchair and whilst the inspector was talking with them, their friend arrived to take them out. This was apparently a regular occurrence. The resident said they did not like the food, but upon further investigation by the inspector, it became evident that the resident’s diet excluded certain foods that St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 13 they wanted because of their healthcare needs. Their friend said they would try to find a cultural restaurant. However, when the inspector discussed the resident’s comments with the Chef, the Chef said he would look into how he could do something to make the food more appealing with particular food colouring and mild spices. A recommendation has been made. The Commission sent out Comment Cards to service users, relatives and any healthcare professional who might be involved with the service users. Six were returned with responses (after the inspection). All but one were positive. However one relative said a new item of clothing had gone missing and never found, and found the washing and ironing of a very poor standard. The same person said “However mum’s care from staff is excellent”. A requirement has been made. The home had an Activities Programme – however the nature and high needs of Service Users meant they did not always want to participate. The home put on Activities which the residents could enjoy in the home. Activities were on a Notice Board and recorded in the Individual Support Care Plan. Recently a group of students from a Speech and Drama School had been to the home to ask Service Users whether they might do Individual Person’s history. The outcome was that those residents who participated had a Personal and personalised history book with photographs. The residents said they had enjoyed that activity. The inspector inspected the kitchen and met with the Chef and his two support staff. Again, the inspector found the atmosphere in the kitchen happy and staff motivated. The larder was filled with fresh food and records indicated that fresh food was delivered twice per week. Menus were seen which was varied and nutritious. Several residents required that their food be blended, and this was served in an appetising manner. The Chef informed that the menu was shown to residents the day before and given a choice of a meal. The residents generally enjoyed meals. The home had a dining room on each floor. The inspector observed staff with residents. Staff were sympathetic to residents’ needs. Some residents were having a chat with staff, whilst others wanted to sit quietly while eating. Other residents required assistance with their feeding and staff were observed to do this in a caring and patient manner. Some residents required Specialist Diets, these were recorded in their Care Plans. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16, 17 & 18 The home had a satisfactory complaints procedure in place that was accessible to service users, relatives and friends. Arrangements in place for the protection of service users from abuse were satisfactory. Service users, who are able to, are able to exercise their rights, with input from advocates and relatives where service users need assistance with this. EVIDENCE: The inspector asked some residents whether they had any complaints. All said they were satisfied. When asked whether they knew who to complain to, those residents spoken to were clear about what to do. They said they would complain to the staff, or the Nurse in Charge and if that was not o.k. they would ask for the Manager or tell their relative. But they insisted they were satisfied. When asked whether they felt their complaint would be dealt with properly, they all expressed confidence in the complaints procedure and the staff. All the residents were registered and had postal votes. The home had a Policy and Procedure. The Registered Manager informed the inspector that for some of the residents who had dementia there was the matter of whether they had the capacity to vote. In those instances, their relative or Advocate would be advised. The home’s Complaints Policy and Procedure was in place and appropriate. The home had their own and the Local Authority’s Abuse Guidelines on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults (PoVa). Staff training files indicated that staff received training and PoVa training was also included in their NVQ training. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 15 Staff were able to tell the inspector about requirements for reporting Abuse and the home’s Whistle Blowing policy. Since April 2005, the home had one complaint, received on the 19th July which was in the process of being dealt with according to the home’s Policy and Procedure. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 16 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 - 26 The home was safe, well-maintained and had specialist equipment for service users. The home was clean, pleasant and hygienic. EVIDENCE: The home was based in North West London – St John’s Wood – and also close to Swiss Cottage amenities and facilities. The layout of the home was suitable for the support and care of people with physical disabilities and for older people. The inspector inspected the premises. The home was purpose built in February 2001 and was relatively new. Maintenance was done with an on-going programme. The home had a maintenance programme which the inspector examined. This evidenced the premises were inspected regularly and maintenance undertaken as and when discovered. The home has a front entrance which was clean and smart. The home had a roof garden which was used by residents and was also accessible to people in wheelchairs. The roof garden had a fence for the safety of residents. The fence St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 17 was high and was of galvanised netting with spaced galvanised posts. This was rather unsightly and could be made more homely and aesthetically pleasing as had been done with the fencing on the ground floor. A recommendation has been made. A CCTV camera was set up for the entrance only for security purposes. The inspector found toilet, washing and bathing facilities were provided to meet the needs of the service users including specialist equipment. The home had all the necessary specialist equipment to meet the service users’ needs. The equipment needed was noted in the Service User’s Care Plan. The Service Users Care Plans indicated they had access to specialist healthcare professionals to assess service users needs for specialist equipment. The home was set on four floors, each floor was self-contained in that it had its own communal rooms such as a lounge and dining room. The rooms were all en-suite, and met the standards for size and furnishing. The rooms were comfortable and were personalised with family photographs, memorabilia and decorations of the resident’s choice. Most residents had a television in their room. The Registered Manager produced the certificates which indicated the Safety checks had been done, such as for the Call System, Fridge/Freezer temperatures, Portable Appliances Testing (PAT), the Safety Audit of the building, the Emergency Lighting, and the Water Chlorination test. Every Wednesday the Fire Alarm was tested and Safety Maintenance such as the Wheelchairs were done. Heating and lighting was satisfactory and emergency lighting was provided throughout the home. The home was clean, pleasant and hygienic. There were no unpleasant odours. Laundry facilities were separate, as was the sluicing facilities. The inspector examined the certificates and found them to be up to date. The inspector had noticed during lunch that some of the cutlery was not 100 clean although the home had a commercial dishwasher. When the inspector inspected the kitchen it was spotless. However, the dishwasher was damaged and patched up with tape. A requirement has been made. (Standard 26). St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27, 29 & 30. Service users needs were met by the numbers and skills mix of staff. Recruitment procedures protected service users. The home was proactive in the training of staff. EVIDENCE: The inspector looked at staff records. The number of staff on the rota agreed with the number of staff present. Night staff were waking-night staff. The manager and deputy advised the inspector that they did unannounced inspections at night to ensure that night staff were undertaking their duties according their agreed contract. Staffing demonstrated a good skills mix as follows: • • • • • Lower Ground Ground floor: 1st Floor : 2nd Floor: 3rd Floor: Floor : 1 Qualified Nurse 4 Care Assistants – 14 Res. 1 Qualified Nurse 3 Care Assistants- 20 Residents. 1 Qualified Nurse 5 Care Assistants – 26 Residents. 1 Qualified Nurse 3 Care Assistants – 16 Residents. 1 Qualified Nurse 3 Care Assistants – 14 Residents. As on the previous inspection, staff described the staffing levels on each floor as “adequate” or “sufficient”. The home continued to meet the statutory staffing notice. Staff confirmed that all shifts were covered and if the dependency levels increased staffing was adjusted t meet the increase in need. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 19 The inspector checked a sample of three staff files, these demonstrated that references were taken up, qualifications were checked and police checks – Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) – were undertaken. Job descriptions were seen. The files seen had the necessary documents. The inspector asked about checks for volunteers. The Manager advised that Volunteers were not generally taken on at the home but was aware that they too should have the necessary checks. The inspector examined training files. These indicated that training was earmarked for staff, staff received training according to their needs and 5 staff were waiting for their NVQ Level 2 certificates. Those certificates seen were for wound management, tissue viability, documentation, record keeping and infection control. The inspector examined service user files and noted that record keeping was clear and informative this enabled a good handover to the next staff. The Induction programme seen for Medication Administration had not been signed off by the Trainer, nor had it been dated. This has also been noted under Standard 9. A requirement has been made. Most of the residents were in their rooms after lunch. When the inspector spoke with some of those residents in their rooms, they said their call bell was answered and they had no complaints. One resident said she would prefer to be in her own home but realised she could not manage on her own. The inspector observed staff with residents who were having lunch or later who were in the communal room. Care staff appeared attentive to residents. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 20 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) 31, 33, 35 & 38 The Manager is qualified, competent and experienced to run the home. The service users welfare is protected. The home observed health and safety practices. EVIDENCE: The Registered Manager gained her Registered General Nursing (RGN) certificate in January 2004. She was at the time of the inspection undertaking the National Vocation Qualification (NVQ) Level 4 in Care Management. During discussions with manager she demonstrated knowledge and involvement with service users and their needs. She worked in close consultation with her Deputy who also demonstrated full knowledge and involvement not only with service users but with all staff under her supervision. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 21 Staff spoken to said they had regular supervision and felt able to approach either manager or deputy if they needed to. When the inspector spoke with service users some said they knew who the manager was and others said they did not. The inspector noted that service users did not always want to chat and did not see the relevance of the inspectors enquiries. They generally said they were satisfied and had no complaints, but would complain if they needed to, to the staff. The inspector met with the Administrator who managed the service users money. The home which is run by Lifestyle, has an accounting system which places service users money in an account at their Head Office. Service User’s monies were not kept at the home. The inspector examined the accounts which indicated that each service user had an account and any interest went to the service user’s account. Full records of each service user was available. The accounts were in order. The home observed all Health & Safety practices. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 22 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score x x 3 x x x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 x 29 3 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 3 3 2 3 3 x 3 x x 3 St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 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. Standard 26 & 35 Regulation 16(2)(e) Requirement The Registered Person must ensure that Service Users clothing is safe, and that laundry services are undertaken with care and to a professional standard to meet the National Mininum Standards. The Registered Person must ensure the Health & Safety of residents and have the Dish Washer replaced to ensure clean cutlery and crockery for service users. The Registered Manager must ensure that Training can be evidenced by having any training received by staff, signed off or signed certificates issued. Timescale for action 31/08/05 2. 26 13(4) 31/10/05. 3. 30 18(1)(c)(i ) 31/08/05 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard 11 Good Practice Recommendations As discussed with the manager, this recommendation serves as a reminder that staff should be advised to be exceptionally sensitive in how they record a residents G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 24 St Johns Wood Care Centre 2. 15 3. 20 passing in their file. The Registered Manager could consult with the Chef as to how a particular residents meals could be made to look more appealing, taking into account their special dietery requirements. The Registered Manager should consider ways and means of enhancing the unsightly appearance of the galvanised fencing to the roof garden. St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.40 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Centro 4 20-23 Mandela Street Camden Town London NW1 0DW 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 St Johns Wood Care Centre G58 s10324 St. Johns v169204 210705 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!