Inspection on 02/08/06 for St Peter`s

This inspection was carried out on 2nd August 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 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 Peter`s 23/08/07

St Peter`s 31/08/05

St Peter`s 23/01/05

St Peter`s 03/08/04

St Peter`s 10/03/04

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE St Peter`s Bishopthorpe Road Westbury on Trym Bristol BS10 5AB Lead Inspector Sandra Garrett Key Unannounced Inspection 2nd & 3rd August 2006 09:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 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 St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 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 Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service St Peter`s Address Bishopthorpe Road Westbury on Trym Bristol BS10 5AB 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) 0117 3532227 0117 9031032 Bristol City Council Miss Jennifer Hall Care Home 30 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (30) of places St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 14 December 2005 Brief Description of the Service: St Peters is operated by Bristol City Council Social Services and Health (SS&H) and registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI). The fee level for this home is: £451.99. The home is situated in the residential area of Westbury-On-Trym, close to Southmead Hospital. St Peters provides personal care for older people over the age of 65. It houses thirty residents with two short stay/respite care places. The former manager has now retired and an experienced manager, transferred from another home locally, has been redeployed permanently into the position. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection took place over a day and a half. Evidence was gained from the pre-inspection questionnaire, surveys of residents, relatives and healthcare professionals and by talking with a number of residents, staff and the management team. Records were examined that included: care plans, activities and key time, plus complaints and health and safety, among others. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Three requirements from the last visit were met and one good practice recommendation was put in practice: Care records showed clear evidence of monthly review and updating when residents needs change. Residents can be confident their changing needs will be met appropriately. Medications management and security was good at this visit. The medications room has been moved next to the office and appropriate security was observed. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Rooms three and four had been re-carpeted that makes each room more comfortable and homely. Further re-carpeting is planned for the whole of the ground floor corridor. This will involve structural work to remove an awkward slope. The inspector has been invited to attend a meeting to discuss how this can best be carried out to avoid disruption for residents. Key time records were improved and gave clear information of residents’ enjoyment of key time activities. 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 Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 2&3 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Satisfactory admission arrangements ensure residents’ needs can be met. Contracts ensure residents know their rights and responsibilities. EVIDENCE: Each resident has a file that they keep in their room. Contained within this file are copies of the home’s Statement of Purpose and Service users guide. Copies of contracts were also seen in the files and these were all signed either by the resident or a relative. All except one contract included room numbers and the person responsible for payment of fees. The manager said she would ensure the appropriate details were entered on the contract with this information missing. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 From the eleven residents’ surveys returned for this inspection, seven said they had received a contract although three said they hadn’t. In respect of information given to people before they become residents, eight said they were given enough information to decide if the home was right for them although two said they hadn’t been given enough. Social work assessments were reviewed to ensure residents’ needs identified at the time of their admission to the home were transferred to care plans. In all but one of the four assessments seen, pre-admission information was available and had been transferred into a meaningful care plan. For the one resident who didn’t have a recent assessment, previous ones were seen for respite care and it was clear at this visit that this resident’s needs were being met appropriately from a regularly updated care plan. Intermediate care is not offered at St Peter’s. Two places are available for respite care and are well used. It was noted that some residents had originally come for respite and chose to make it their permanent home when they could no longer remain living in the community. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 & 10 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents are looked after well in respect of health and personal care needs. Secure management ensures residents are looked after well in respect of their medication needs and are kept safe from potential errors. Residents benefit from being treated with dignity and respect by staff at the home. EVIDENCE: A requirement in respect of recording monthly care plan reviews for each resident was met. Sheets containing dates of review and whether changes had been made were seen for each resident’s notes examined. One resident whose needs had changed significantly over a month had an entirely new and comprehensive care plan in place that clearly showed how her/his needs would be met. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Overall, care plans were clear and detailed and showed how residents’ needs are met. However it was noted that a resident’s preferred name wasn’t recorded despite one resident being referred to by two different names. It was advised that the preferred name should be clearly recorded as the resident’s own choice. Further, one resident had mental health support needs identified from the preadmission assessment. Whilst this had been transferred into the care plan, actions recorded were not clear enough to show how the resident would be supported. The manager agreed to amend the care plan to show more clearly how staff would support this resident. Issues of diversity and equality were checked. One resident has a specified key worker who is of her/his cultural origin and the cook said that she prepares culturally appropriate meals for this resident. The care plan also identified cultural personal care tasks for this resident. Residents’ healthcare needs are given priority within the home. A district nurse and chiropodist were seen visiting the home at this inspection. Regular notices of residents’ ill health or injury are promptly sent to the inspector. The home has a good relationship with GPs and healthcare professionals. One healthcare professional wrote in a comment card issued by the Commission for Social Care Inspection before this visit: ‘I care for several residents in this home. I would recommend the care to anyone. The staff always try to meet residents’ needs and are clearly aware of them. We have a very good working relationship’. Of the eleven surveys completed by residents for this visit five stated that their medical needs were always met and four stated that they were usually met. Residents commented: ‘every attention is paid to me if I require medical support…I get a doctor to see me if I need one’ and: ‘The officers see if we need a doctor and call one for you’. A requirement in respect of ensuring safe medication practice was met. The medical room has now been moved and is next door to the new management team office. Medications were all locked away in the room and none were left out. Medication administration was appropriately managed and all Medication Administration Sheets were correctly filled in. The medications fridge was locked and the temperature recorded daily. Management staff were seen signing for medications after they were given. This is good practice. Staff were observed treating residents with dignity and respect. Good relationships and positive interactions were observed. One resident commented in the survey: ‘The staff are brilliant and they see to my needs right away’. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 & 15 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Whilst activities are available, further consultation with residents is needed to ensure they are happy with the standard of social contact offered. Meals at the home are well managed and provide daily variation, good nutrition and social contact for residents. EVIDENCE: A Bingo session was held during the first day of this visit. Activities records were examined but it was clear that some sort of group activity isn’t held every week. Further, activities were usually Bingo, quizzes or manicures. It was noted that the home currently has the services of a volunteer who comes in to do any sort of activity with residents. This person was seen during the visit and it was noted that she had done several manicures for residents. One resident’s nails had been painted a bright cyclamen colour that she was very pleased with. The hairdresser also visits weekly. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 However key time had improved following a requirement made at the last visit. Records were also greatly improved and showed clear information of the type of one to one activity offered to each resident. Further, they showed residents enjoyment of this and gave an insight into residents’ lives in the home. The manager said she had concentrated on improving key time and although this had worked well it could be to the detriment of more group social activities. A good practice recommendation is made to ensure residents are consulted on what activities they would like and frequency of them as well as continuing key time. It was noted that some residents prefer not to join in with activities and some residents want more personal care tasks done for them in key time. Comments from the residents survey were mixed in respect of this issue: Five residents said activities were always arranged whilst four said ‘sometimes and one said ‘usually’. However one comment stated: ‘The staff are at all times arranging activities for us and to support them I attend every function I can’. Menus for two weeks were submitted with the pre-inspection questionnaire. The inspector joined residents for lunch on the first day of this visit. It was noted that there was a long delay before any resident was served and some residents commented on this. However the manager said that there had been a kitchen delay and that this was unusual. It was noted that serving of meals is rotated so that each table is served quickly and not left until last each time. The meal of roast chicken, stuffing and vegetables was hot, tasty and nutritious. Culturally appropriate meals are offered to meet the needs of some residents but other residents like these meals too. Choice is offered at breakfast, lunch and tea and a high tea is available each day. From those residents who completed surveys seven said they always like the meals and three said they usually like them. Comments included: ‘the meals we get are delicious and varied. The quality of the vegetables is high and the two cooks are in a class of their own’ and ‘we always get or eat hot nice meals’. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 16 & 18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Satisfactory complaints management and recording ensures residents can feel confident in raising concerns about any aspect of their care. Arrangements for protecting residents ensure that residents are protected as far as possible from risk or harm. EVIDENCE: The home’s complaints record was reviewed and no complaints had been received since before the last visit in December ’05. Copies of the Social Services and Health complaints leaflet were seen in all residents’ files kept in their rooms. From the survey done at this visit seven residents stated that they always knew who to speak to if they are not happy and three stated that they usually know. In respect of complaints themselves one resident wrote: ‘At the moment I get every attention I need and I have not one complaint’. The inspector had received a letter praising the home for the care it was giving one resident and other complimentary letters were seen at the front of the file. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 From relatives’ surveys received comments included: ‘a relative and I visit frequently to this very welcoming and well run home. We recognise that our parent needs more care that some of the others here, but staff are patient and kind at all times, never unkind. I feel my parent would not have survived if s/he had been admitted to hospital. It is entirely due to the commitment and support of all staff that s/he has survived and that her/his quality of life has improved’. Another wrote: ‘I am very glad that my relative is at St Peter’s which compares most favourably with all the others I have seen. I have the greatest regard and respect for the care and professional attitude of the staff’. All the above is commended. No adult protection issues had occurred since the last visit. Staff confirmed that they had all had training in protecting residents from abuse, including agency staff. Staff said they felt confident in being able to recognise and report any abuse issues that may occur. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 the following standard(s): 19 & 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents benefit from living in a comfortable, clean, hygienic and safe standard of accommodation that is well maintained. EVIDENCE: St Peter’s is currently undergoing some refurbishment to its environment. Changes have included: dividing the upstairs lounge into two smaller sitting and TV areas, re-locating the management team office and medication room and moving the staff room so that it’s closer to residents’ rooms. The dining room has been re-floored in a non-slip wood effect vinyl and decorated throughout. Further refurbishment is planned including levelling the sloping ground floor corridor before re-carpeting it and decorating the ground floor public areas. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 A requirement in respect of replacing carpet in two residents’ rooms was met and new carpeting was seen in both. The requirement included the ground floor corridor but this will need careful planning to ensure residents’ lives are disrupted as little as possible. The inspector has been invited to a meeting at the home to discuss this further before work starts. The home was clean, fresh and pleasant smelling throughout this visit. Domestic staff were seen cleaning in all areas and toilets were all clean and hygienic. Residents had commented in the completed surveys: ‘The domestic staff is always on time to clean my room’ and: ‘The home is kept very clean and my room is cleaned every day and the laundry service is excellent’. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 consider all the above are key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Attention is needed to ensure that care staff are enabled to work as a team to meet residents needs promptly. Residents’ benefit from trained staff who are able to meet their needs although attention is needed to ensure staff have access to suitable training to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: Rotas had been supplied with the pre-inspection questionnaire together with agency staff details. It was noted that a high number of agency staff are being used although there are only two permanent post vacancies. The manager said that the need for agency staff was due to permanent staff having left and also to hold posts open for staff re-deployment when other homes close. However residents commented on this issue and staff morale, throughout the visit. Residents expressed concern about high numbers of agency staff and having to get used to new faces. Some residents commented to the inspector that agency staff attitudes were sometimes poor although they said the manager had been quick to respond by telling the agency not to send these staff again. The manager confirmed that if residents make any complaint about an agency staff member’s attitude the agency is immediately contacted and the person doesn’t return. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Comments from residents surveyed indicated this problem: ‘The use of agency staff due to lack of permanent staff does cause problems, as many of them seem untrained and reluctant to ask permanent staff if in doubt’. A reference to staffing levels was also noted: ‘At the moment it is understaffed – could do with more staff and helpers’. Staff confirmed that sometimes low staffing levels add more pressure in trying to ensure all residents’ needs are met. It was noted that some agency staff have been working at the home for over two years and are treated as ‘permanent’ staff by residents and staff alike. The inspector met with five care staff at this visit, two of whom were permanent, one in a temporary post and two long-term agency staff. Staff freely discussed their concerns about their workload, the difficulty of a changing workforce, and their striving to ensure residents’ needs are quickly met. The manager and staff confirmed that extra staff hours are in place to meet the needs of frailer residents and that this helps the situation. Staff gave clear information about their working practices but admitted that better teamwork could help more than having greater numbers of staff. A good practice recommendation is made to consider ways to improve teamwork amongst care staff. From the pre-inspection questionnaire it was noted that 30 of care staff have National Vocational Qualification level 2 in care. One agency staff said she also had NVQ level 2 and had found it helpful in understanding how to meet residents’ needs. The manager confirmed NVQ training is ongoing for all staff that haven’t yet done it. Staff confirmed that other training is offered to them including manual handling and adult protection. Staff said they felt they would benefit from more training in working with mental health needs and dementia care. A good practice recommendation is made to consider ongoing training in these matters due to the level of residents’ mental health support needs in the home. A change to the way the Commission inspects personnel records away from the home has been put in place and records will be examined later in the year. However a Criminal Records Bureau check was seen for a volunteer who supports residents with activities. This is good practice. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35, 37 & 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Residents benefit from having a trained and experienced manager. Suitable mechanisms for enabling residents to comment about their satisfaction with life in the home enables them to be sure their views and opinions will be taken into consideration. Residents’ finances are well managed that ensures they are protected from financial abuse. Improvements in recordkeeping ensure residents are respected and the quality of their lives within the home is regularly monitored. Residents’ health and safety is promoted by clear policies and procedures that keep them safe. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 EVIDENCE: The manager is trained to NVQ level 4 and is an experienced manager of many years standing. She is currently undergoing application to the Commission to become the registered and named manager for St Peter’s following the previous manager’s retirement. Throughout this visit the manager demonstrated her understanding of residents’ needs from a person-centred approach that puts the resident at the centre of everything that is done for them. Residents commented positively on the manager’s approach and staff said they thought she was ‘really good’ and that they could go to her with any problem. One GP surveyed commented: ‘ I am generally very happy with the level of care at St Peters especially since Lorraine Knight became manager. My work’s always much easier when she is in charge and her approach filters down to the other staff’. It was noted that a programme of quality assurance visits by a private company engaged by the City Council is being carried out and the home will be receiving a visit shortly. Areas covered by this quality assurance survey include: environment, personal care, facilities, activities, meals and staffing. The inspector has requested that the surveyor submits a copy of his report when collated, to the Commission. Regular team manager visit reports are sent to the Commission that identify quality areas from discussion with the manager and are used as an internal quality monitoring tool. A random check of residents’ cash was carried out. All were found to be correct and regular balance checks noted. No issues of residents’ not getting their personal allowances regularly were found. All records examined at this visit were found to be in good order and well maintained. Daily records were largely written in respectful language and from a person-centred approach. Health and safety records were examined and it was noted that all fire checks and fire drills were carried out regularly and were up to date. The Fire Brigade had carried out a Fire safety inspection in the last month although no report had yet been received. Any equipment faults found through the regular checks had been reported and repaired quickly. The fire safety log was in good order with clear records and assessments of fire drills. Call bells were in good working order and no substances hazardous to health were seen around the home. St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X 3 3 X X X HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 3 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 3 29 X 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X 3 3 St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1 2 3 Refer to Standard OP12 OP27 OP30 Good Practice Recommendations Activities provision should be reviewed in consultation with residents to ensure their needs for social time together are meaningful and regular Ways should be found of ensuring that care staff work as a team in order to use their time most effectively to meet residents’ needs Care staff should be offered continuing training in working with mental health needs and dementia care St Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection Bristol North LO 300 Aztec West Almondsbury South Glos BS32 4RG 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 Peter`s DS0000035285.V305586.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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!