Inspection on 23/05/07 for Stanbeck

This inspection was carried out on 23rd May 2007.

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

Stanbeck 05/12/07

Stanbeck 23/05/06

Stanbeck 17/01/06

Stanbeck 09/08/05

Stanbeck 14/01/05

Stanbeck 27/05/04

Stanbeck 12/02/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Clover House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Stanbeck Stainburn Road Workington Cumbria CA14 4EA Lead Inspector Nancy Saich Unannounced Inspection 23rd May 2007 10:00 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 Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Stanbeck Address Stainburn Road Workington Cumbria CA14 4EA 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) 01900 603611 Mrs Audrey Robinson Mrs Audrey Robinson Care Home 13 Category(ies) of Learning disability over 65 years of age (1), Old registration, with number age, not falling within any other category (13) of places Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The service should at all times employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection The home is registered for a maximum of 13 service users to include: up to 13 service users in the category OP (older people) One named person in the category of learning disability over 65 years of age LD(E) 23rd May 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Stanbeck is a modern purpose built home in a residential area of Workington. It is situated approximately half a mile from the centre of town and is on a bus route. Parking is at the front of the property. The home has a large garden and a patio area. Accommodation is on two floors with a passenger lift. Bedrooms are single occupancy with ensuite toilet facilities. There is a dining room on the first floor that leads out to the patio. The lounge is on the ground floor with access to the garden. The home is primarily for older people but may also take people in other categories as detailed above. The home is owned and managed by Mrs Audrey Robinson and her two daughters help her in this. Together they make up the management team. Mrs Robinson also runs a bed and breakfast business on the same site. Information about the home can be obtained from the provider. The home does not have a website or an e-mail address. The home charges £368 per week. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was the main inspection for this year and the lead inspector, Nancy Saich and Penny Wilkinson – Regulation Manager visited the home. They spoke to residents, visitors, and staff and to the owner and her daughters. Some time before this unannounced visit the inspector had asked for information about the home but this had not been received by the day of the visit. She also sent out residents’ surveys but only one was returned. The lead inspector had made another visit to the home on Sunday 4th March 2007 as a response to a complaint. This complaint was upheld. The lead inspector also asked the pharmacy inspector Angela Branch to visit the home unannounced on 12th April 2007. A total of fifteen legal requirements were made as a result of these two random visits. There are two letters from these visits and copies of these can be obtained by requesting them from the Penrith office. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The home has improved the systems they use to manage medicines on behalf of residents. The inspectors saw a much better monitoring system. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Some areas of the home had been redecorated and some new furniture provided. Carpets had been cleaned and this had improved the bad odour in the home. An extra member of the care staff team is on duty in the evenings and residents and staff said that this had improved the quality of life in the home. The written records of staff supervision were good and staff said that they could go to the managers if anything worried them. 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. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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 Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1,3,4 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home has failed to make sure that they only take residents who they know they can care for appropriately. EVIDENCE: The inspectors asked to look at the information the home provide for residents. They saw one contract and the Statement of Purpose. They found the contract to be detailed but found that the other document that should explain how care and services are delivered still doesn’t describe how they meet the needs of people with learning disabilities or mental health needs. They looked at the files of one or two new people and spoke to them. One person had made a definite choice to come to the home. Some social work assessments couldn’t be provided for the inspectors despite the fact that there was evidence to show that a social worker had arranged the admission. The Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 homes own assessments weren’t complete for some people who had been in the home for some time. The inspectors looked at all aspects of care and services for everyone in the home. They discovered that although they had taken people into the home with assessments of ‘learning disability’ or ‘depression’ they were not able to fully meet the specialised needs of these individuals. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10,11 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Health and personal care matters do not always meet the needs of people with complex needs. EVIDENCE: The inspectors read all of the written plans that help residents get the care that they need. They found that some things –like physical care or manual handling – were quite well written. They also found that some things like emotional needs or helping people with managing their behaviour weren’t written in any depth. They judged that the plans for people with learning disability needed a lot more detail. The random visit showed that there were times when peoples’ health care needs weren’t being met. There were also one or two issues during this visit that needed following up. People who had lost weight didn’t have nutritional plans. There was evidence to show that the home needs to be better at supporting and communicating health needs so that the personal and emotional support the staff provide back up what the health carers are doing. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 The pharmacy inspector had visited the home and she found a number of errors and problems with the way medication was being managed (information about this is found in her report dated 12th April 2007). At this key inspection the lead inspector checked on all the requirements and found that good progress had been made and the systems were much improved. The registered person was advised about storage of medication and there are more details about this later in the report. Some residents did think that the staff group treated them properly and were pleased with the way that they helped them maintain privacy and dignity. On this key inspection visit the inspectors saw staff working well with residents and following plans. However at the random visit the lead inspector found that peoples’ personal care was not being followed correctly. On both days the daily notes showed that sometimes staff were not sure how to deal with privacy and dignity when people were having physical, emotional or psychological problems. Two people who visit the home had told CSCI that they were concerned about the way care was being delivered. The inspectors have extended the requirement about maintaining privacy and dignity but will focus on this again at the next visit. At the random visit the lead inspector found that care of people in the late stages of life was not up to standard. They had no physical evidence to show that this had not improved. They did speak to staff about this briefly and to health professionals and they were prepared to accept that any failings in the past had been looked at and won’t be repeated. This will be looked at again at future visits. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14,15 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents do not get enough opportunities to have lifestyles that provide fulfilling activities and give them purpose to their lives. EVIDENCE: The inspectors spoke to residents and checked care plans and found that there was evidence to show that people were given some choice about when to get up and when to go to bed. Some people ate their meals in their rooms. Generally people in the home spend a lot of time in their own rooms. One or two people like to sit in the lounge. Residents were asked about how they spent their time. They said they talked to each other and watched TV or read the paper. No one said they went out with staff although one or two people go out with friends. There was no evidence in care plans that showed that people followed hobbies or interests or were involved with the local community. Several people said they were bored and wanted more to do. Some people did not really know what was happening locally or even nationally. There was nothing seen that proved that activities of Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 daily life were planned to meet peoples social, cultural or care needs. They did see some things that were not appropriate to the age of the people involved. There was no programme of activities in the home and the inspectors wondered whether staff actually had enough time to discover what people wanted, plan the activities and give people the kind of support and encouragement they needed. Residents said that they could have visitors when they wanted and one or two people were around on the day of the visit and said they were made welcome in the home. The management do not hold residents meetings but said they asked residents what they wanted on a daily basis. Residents said that they were asked but a number of people said they were no longer knew what they wanted. These residents said they weren’t happy in the home and one or two people felt they were ‘prisoners’ in the home. The inspectors judged that some people actually felt very helpless and that things were done to them and not for them. One resident who was a quiet person said that a lot of people had disagreements. Some of this was seen in the daily notes. This person thought that boredom made people disagree. This was the way residents perceived their choices. Staff thought that they were offering plenty of choice but residents were too apathetic to do anything. This situation needs to change and the registered provider needs to move this forward as some of her residents have expressed this unhappiness on more than one occasion. A visitor to the home said to the inspectors: • ‘If social needs were being met people would be less gloomy and have things to look forward to….’. The inspectors enjoyed a pleasant lunch with residents and people said that they enjoyed the food on offer. Some people who didn’t eat very well didn’t have nutritional plans in place. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The registered person needs to put more effort into listening to people and to making sure staff know how to protect them. EVIDENCE: There was a major complaint made directly to the Commission for Social Care Inspection in March 2007,investigated by the lead inspector. The complaint was about how care was delivered and about hygiene standards in the home. All elements of the complaint were found to be true and a number of requirements were made about this. The registered person accepted the outcome of this investigation. The inspectors spoke to residents and several did have trust and faith in the registered person and her family and thought they would deal with major complaints or with abuse in the correct fashion. However one person said: • ‘What is the point of complaining, we aren’t listened to and nothing changes.’ No one in the home has an advocate who is working actively with him or her. No one had any kind of help to fill out surveys from CSCI and only one was returned. Other residents said that they just accepted things as they were as: • ‘What else can we expect in a home…’ Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The inspectors read the documents that cover these matters and they found that although there was up to date guidance about how to help protect people the staff were using an out of date version. Staff were not really confident about how to report abuse. Training records showed that staff needed to have updates to help them with this. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,26 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. This home needs to be upgraded so that residents will be more comfortable in their environment. EVIDENCE: The inspectors walked around all areas of the building and found that although it was cleaner than it had been on the Sunday of the random visit. Some areas are pleasantly decorated and furnished but in general the house is really in need of updating and improvement. Staff have done some decorating and have dealt with the odours in carpets but there is still a lot to be done. This home has problems in the following areas. • Some chairs have loosened joints and are a health and safety risk. • The medicine cupboard needs fixed securely to a wall • The bathroom carpet is a trip hazard. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 • • • • Some mattresses and bed frames are stained and sagging. Some bedroom furniture is marked and damaged and needs updating. The staff toilet is being used as a store room Some bedrooms need redecorating. The registered provider needs to tell the Commission for Social Care inspection how they intend to improve the home. She also needs to consult and inform residents about her plans to upgrade the home. On the day of the key inspection care staff were doing cleaning jobs. The one returned survey said they thought • ‘The home would be improved if they employed a domestic. …and then carers could spend time with residents and someone else could do the cleaning properly…’ Another person said that provision for hand washing could be better. The inspectors also thought this needed improvement. Staff and residents alike were sharing one towel and there were no paper towels and no separate provision for staff to use before they came into the kitchen. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29,30 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The provision of more staff with more suitable training would help residents to have a more comfortable and fulfilling life. EVIDENCE: The inspectors looked at the rosters for the last three months. Generally two members of staff have care, cleaning, laundry and some cooking to do. The management team are around but they have management tasks to undertake. There was evidence to show that sometimes two relatively inexperienced people have been left in charge of the home. In the past there were some evenings when only one person was on duty doing all the necessary tasks. This didn’t meet the needs of the residents. The management has put one extra person on in the evening and the staff said that this was much better. However the registered person agreed there were still some times when only one person was on duty. Residents and visitors did say that staff worked hard and tried their best and the inspectors also judged that they put a lot of effort into their work and did the best they could under the circumstances. The inspectors looked at the files on staff recruitment and found that although the systems should work well they had taken someone on without getting two Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 proper references. This means that residents’ wellbeing and safety could be compromised. Although there was evidence to show that basic training is done well and that people are registered for National Vocational Qualifications there are a number of areas where staff need more input. These include understanding depression, dementia, working with people with learning disabilities, care of the dying, protection of vulnerable adults and managing challenging behaviour. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 34, 35, 37,38 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Management systems in this home are not meeting residents’ care or social needs and may be compromising their safety. EVIDENCE: The provider of the home is both the registered provider and registered manager. The inspectors judged that she was delegating a lot of her role to her daughters. They were also delivering care and doing other practical tasks. The inspectors want to see evidence that shows that the organisation of all of these tasks is done in such a way that care and services to residents are as good as they should be. Currently the outcomes for residents are not showing that this is the case. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 The home does have a quality assurance system but there has been little work done on this recently. A new quality audit needs to be done so that residents’, relatives and other visitors’ views can be taken into consideration. Due to the reduction in staffing and the need for investment in the environment the inspectors want to see a business and financial plan for Stanbeck to check that the home is financially viable. The inspectors checked on money kept on behalf of residents and found that this was accounted for. The inspectors made some suggestions about how to make the records a little clearer and wanted to see one person being supported to manage her own money better. The written notes on the supervision of staff were quite good and these showed that the management team do try to keep staff competence and improvement on the agenda. A number of records were looked at on the day. Some were good and gave plenty of information but a lot of the homes records don’t really reflect on what is happening within the building or with the residents. The inspectors found that some of the carpets and furniture might pose a health and safety risk and they were concerned that the staff toilet was out of use. Together these things might compromise residents’ safety. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.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 2 X 1 1 X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 3 10 2 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 1 13 2 14 1 15 2 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 2 17 X 18 2 2 X X X X X X 1 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 1 28 3 29 2 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 2 X 2 2 2 3 2 1 Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes 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 OP3 Regulation 14 (1) Requirement Timescale for action 01/08/07 2. OP4 12 (4) (b) All residents must have a full assessment completed by a person who is suitably trained to do so and that are kept up to date. Copies of these assessments must be available within the resident’s file. The registered person must 23/05/07 provide evidence to show that the needs of people with learning disabilities and people with mental health problems can be met in full. This is an outstanding requirement from 15/04/07 All care plans must be updated and reviewed. The registered person must include strategies for complex needs and must ask advice from relevant professionals where the delivery of care has been problematic to the staff team. This is an outstanding requirement from15/04/07 and has been extended. The registered person must ensure that residents receive DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc 3. OP7 15 01/08/07 4. OP8 13 (1) 01/08/07 Stanbeck Version 5.2 Page 24 5. OP10 12 (4) (b) 6. OP12 16 (2) (m) and (n) 12 (2) and (3) 7. OP14 8. OP19 16 (2) (c) 9. OP26 13 (3) 10. OP27 18 (1) (a) 11. OP29 19 (1) (c) 12. OP30 18 (1) (c) appropriate health care at all times. This is an outstanding requirement from15/04/07 and has been extended. The registered person must provide evidence to show that the care provided in the home allows people to have privacy and dignity at all times. This is an outstanding requirement from15/04/07 and has been extended. The activities and routines of daily living must be made more flexible to meet expectations, preferences and capacities. The registered person must prove that residents are given options and choices, have their concerns acted upon and have a full say in the way the home operates. The registered person must provide the inspector with a detailed plan of how the furniture, fittings and decor will be upgraded The registered person must ensure that systems are in place to control the spread of infection and to maintain good levels of hygiene. The registered person must make sure that between 8 a.m and 10 p.m there are always at least two people on duty who can deliver care. The registered person must ensure that two written references are taken up before a new person starts to work in the home. It is required that a new training plan is in place that covers all the basic training but also addresses the following: • understanding depression, • dementia, DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 01/08/07 Stanbeck Version 5.2 Page 25 • • • • • 13. OP33 24 (1) working with people with learning disabilities, care of the dying, protection of vulnerable adults managing challenging behaviour. activities for the mix of residents’ needs. 01/08/07 14. OP34 25 (2) and (3) 15. OP38 23(2),(3) and (5) . A quality monitoring exercise needs to be undertaken to gauge the views of residents and other people involved in the way the home runs. A business and financial plan must prepared with timings and costs for improvement and a copy of this is made available for residents and for the lead inspector. The registered person must ensure that health and safety matters are being dealt with properly and meet the requirements of the local Environmental health officer. 01/08/07 01/08/07 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 OP1 Good Practice Recommendations The registered person needs to review the Statement of Purpose to include how she provides suitable care and activities for people with learning disabilities and for people with mental health needs The registered person needs to make links with community groups who will introduce activities and entertainments into the home. It is recommended that some residents have nutritional plans in place to encourage them to eat well. DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 2 3 OP13 OP15 Stanbeck 4 OP16 5. OP18 6. 7. 8. OP19 OP27 OP31 10. OP35 11. OP37 It is recommended that the registered person review her complaints procedure and make sure that residents, relatives and other visitors have access to this and that any concerns are treated seriously and acted upon. It is recommended that the registered person review her procedures that protect the residents from abuse and makes sure that residents, visitors and staff are aware of how people are to be protected. It is recommended that the provider assess all the furniture and floor coverings in the home with a view to repairing or replacing anything that is shabby. It is recommended that the register person employ someone whose sole job it is to clean the home. It is recommended that the registered provider consider how the delegation of management task is working in the home and how this ensures that she fulfils her role as the registered person. It is recommended that the provider make one or two changes to the way she keeps the records of residents’ money and helps one person to become more independent in managing money. It is recommended that the recording systems in the home be checked regularly to make sure that they are detailed and up to date. Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 Commission for Social Care Inspection Eamont House Penrith 40 Business Park Gillan Way Penrith Cumbria CA11 9BP National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 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 Stanbeck DS0000022615.V335524.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 - 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!