Inspection on 05/10/06 for Stonecroft House Care Home

This inspection was carried out on 5th October 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is (sorry - unknown). The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 1 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Stonecroft House Care Home 06/01/09

Stonecroft House Care Home 14/03/08

Stonecroft House Care Home 14/02/06

Stonecroft House Care Home 15/11/05

Stonecroft House Care Home 03/03/05

Stonecroft House Care Home 23/11/04

Similar services:

Snydale Care Home

Staveley Birk Leas Nursing Home

Fairmount Nursing Home

Currergate Nursing Home

Brookfield

Castlethorpe Care Home

Elmleigh Convent

Woodlands Respite Care Centre

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Stonecroft House Care Home Barnetby North Lincolnshire DN38 6DY Lead Inspector Theresa Bryson Key Unannounced Inspection 5th October 2006 09:30 DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 DS0000002805.V315148.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 Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Stonecroft House Care Home Address Barnetby North Lincolnshire DN38 6DY 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) 01652 688344 01652 688594 www.leonard-cheshire.org.uk Leonard Cheshire Margaret Ann Fotherby Care Home 29 Category(ies) of Physical disability (29), Physical disability over registration, with number 65 years of age (29) of places DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 5 day care places available in addition to the above Date of last inspection 14th February 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Stonecroft Care Home is situated in a rural position close to the small village of Barnetby and the M180 motorway. The main house is Victorian in style, with a modern extension and set in extensive grounds overlooking the Lincolnshire Wolds. All rooms have views of open countryside and are styled for the individual service users. All bedrooms are single occupancy and eight have en-suite facilities. The home is designed for easy access for those in wheelchairs. The gardens are well maintained and offer a variety of settings to sit and walk in and service users are encouraged to take part in their maintenance. There are a number of different sitting rooms within the home, plus a very large dining area and separate activities room. The home provides care for those with a physical disability from residential category service users through to those with more complex nursing needs. These include 5 places for those with an acquired brain injury, but these places are not taken at the present time. Stonecroft is owned by the Leonard Cheshire Foundation and the local team of Matron, professionally trained nurses, carers and other ancillary staff are supported by a regional and head office team. Information on the service is always available in the front entrance and also can be sent to any prospective service. The Home accepts service users from a variety of sources and will also accept those who are local authority funded and privately funded. The fees vary according to need, as do any extra services such as hairdressing and newspapers. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection took place over one day in October 2006 and was unannounced. Prior to the inspection the previous year’s history of the home was tracked plus any correspondence sent by the Foundation or other agencies.16 surveys were sent to families, of which 9 were returned; 23 to the people living in the home; of which 12 were returned; 9 to outside agencies of which 4 were returned and 35 to staff of which 18 were returned. The inspector visited 5 people prior to the site visit and spoke to 2 by telephone; she also spoke to 2 social work staff by telephone. 9 staff were spoken to on the day and 5 people who live in the home. During the site visit the Acting Manager Ms.M.Soulby-Ashton was present, also the Area Manager and another manager from a Leonard Cheshire home. What the service does well: The home is always very welcoming to visitors and make new people using the service a part of the home as soon as they can. Care is also taken to ensure that the views of people living in the home are listened to and that they not only have a voice as to their own care, but also of the communal running of the home as a whole. As one new person stated they had been very nervous about coming to the home but felt very relaxed and welcomed very quickly. The meals provided by the home are wholesome and offer a wide range of choice. Consideration is given to individual tastes and needs and also storage is available if people living in the home want to have instant meals put to one side and take away food from local sources can be accommodated for peoples choice. The Foundation ensures that the environment is safe to live and work in and that people living there have a voice in what type of redecoration takes place. This also includes the garden area and care has been taken to ensure people have been instrumental in a new sensory garden and what should be planted. Local staff are supported by a strong area and head office staff, who ensure that recruitment policies are sound and staff are safe to work in the home prior to commencing employment. The team also ensure they have been trained in DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 the areas necessary to look after each individual and this training is updated on a regular basis. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The recording of social and cultural activities participated in by people living in the home was written in a spasmodic manner and the inspector could not get an accurate picture that everyone’s needs were being met. The emotional care and support to people living in the home and to their loved ones was poorly recorded and some errors found from information the inspector was given by relatives. There needs to be better liaising between the activities department, the volunteers department and individual key workers as well as people living in the home and their loved ones to ensure that each person is looked after holistically and their needs are always met with in a sometimes changing framework for each individual. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. Comprehensive information is provided to assist prospective service users in making informed decision about the services provided by the home. EVIDENCE: No new permanent admissions had been accepted in to the home since the last inspection, but there had been one admission on a respite basis. Documentation for this person had been completed and showed that the staff had looked at the needs of the person in an holistic manner. The staff had followed the home’s procedures and had completed all initial information within the 3-day window. This gave staff a good indication of the person’s initial needs and also made the person feel comfortable and accepted into the home. On speaking to the service user, she had been concerned about coming in to care, but the acceptance by other service users and staff had made her feel at home, for the time she was resident. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. Service users’ assessed needs are recorded using a comprehensive tool and supported to lead as independent a life as possible. EVIDENCE: Prior to the visit to the service 16 survey forms were sent out to relatives and 9 returned, 23 to service users and 12 returned, 9 to outside agencies and 4 returned and 4 sets of relatives were interviewed in person, and 2 by telephone. 2 members of the social work team were also spoken to by telephone. 3 service users were spoken to on the day. The inspector was also able to track 6 care plans of service users. These had greatly improved since the last visit and the surveys received and people spoken to generally felt the service had improved over the last few months. Those that had raised issues were highlighted to the Acting manager and written feedback was asked for by the inspector. There was enough written evidence in the care plans for the inspector to see what care had been delivered to each individual. The individual plans stated DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 how much assistance each person required and also statements from each individual or their next of kin to show that their individual wishes were being adhered to by staff. The daily report sheets were still being written in a task orientated manner and there also needed to be a section on forward planning and goals set for more long term aims of each person. This had also been highlighted by families who stated they felt that at times staff had a more shorter time scale and a too early acceptance that a person had reached their potential. This was still not well documented. A great deal of time is invested in how service users can participate not only in their own care but also of the general running of the home. This aspect of caring for people in this setting has in the past tended to run away with the management team, but now seemed to be more organised, with specific responsibilities not only allocated to staff, but also service users to run, such as the Council meetings within the home. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,15,16 and 27. Quality in this out come area is adequate. This judgment has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. Service users are encouraged to maintain relationships and opportunities are given for personal development and their rights respected. More variety should be on offer to help stimulate and develop long-term goals. EVIDENCE: The home still has an activities coordinator and also a volunteers coordinator, who work closely together to help service users achieve different levels of independence both inside and outside the home. There was some recorded evidence that some service users were attending out side courses such as computer skills and art classes. The activities coordinator aimed to take a couple of people out to events or just shopping in the local community, this was not always possible due to some staff shortages and when volunteers could attend the home. The written records for service users had been spasmodically written and not all had been recently evaluated. It had been identified by some service users and families that they did not feel stretched enough in their daily lives, but felt DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 constricted by staffing issues. This was passed on to the Acting manager and Area manager. This could result in not everyone’s individual needs being met at each stage of their lives and that forward planning appeared not to be included in this section of a person’s care planning needs. Relatives and service users also identified to the inspector that they felt most activities were not age related, which caused them some frustration and could hinder their personal development. During the conversation with the activities coordinator it was stated some training had taken place, but this needs to be developed and also the role of the volunteers coordinator, as both should work well together if they are fully aware of each person’s personal development needs, within the home. The home has always stated that it has problems involving the local community in the home and also for servvei users to involve themselves in local events. More effort appeared to have been put into this aspect of the management of the home and a couple of service users were now attending regular weekly events in the near by market town. The inspector toured the kitchen area with the cook and kitchen assistant. Food appeared to be prepared in a safe and clean environment, with all checks having been completed and recorded. Since the last visit the Foundation had purchased a new freezer and fridge, which were in working order. There had been no concerns raised concerning the food and menu planning. The cook stated she spoke to individual service users, but had not done so since the present manager had been off duty. Previous visits to service users and families also appeared not to have been recorded. It would be good practise if this could be recommenced, as individual needs and wishes can then be recorded and adhered to by those preparing any meal and snack. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19 and 20. Quality in this out come area is good. This judgment has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. Service users are supported in their personal preferences and physical and emotional needs and given medication, where appropriate in a safe manner. EVIDENCE: The individual service users plans tracked supported with written evidence that efforts are made by staff to ensure their preferences and needs are being met. Staff need to be aware that the daily reports are very task orientated, and do not always reflect the time they spend, other health professionals or relatives in ensuring that emotional needs are bring met. Relatives identified times they had discussed with staff concerns about their loved ones emotional state, but no evidence could be found that those conversations had taken place. This has always been a delicate subject, but some relatives did not feel supported emotionally and a method should be ought on how this can be accurately recorded for everyone’s benefit. An evaluation of the drug administration system had been completed since the last inspection and this has greatly improved the recording of drugs and staff participation on recording accurately all medication given. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 The policy has been updated and a staff ember allocated to ensure the system works smoothly and safely, even for those who still choose to self medicate. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 and 23. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgment has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. The Foundation has a robust complaints policy which service users are not concerned about using to identify unsafe practises. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection 1 complaint had been received by the local CSCI office concerning care issues with a service user. This had been partially substantiated and dealt with by the local social service team. The matter was currently resolved. The complaints log was seen and showed that two complaints had been received internally, one of which was still being dealt with by the area team. In the survey forms and in speaking to relatives and service users no current problems had not been addressed, but they highlighted that although they are happy to use the complaints process and with the current acting management in place concerns were being addressed, they did not have a great deal of confidence in the communication skills of some staff. This was also seen in the recording of some care notes and discussions with relatives not recorded by staff. Failure to accurately record could result in needs and concerns being unmet and service users not fulfilling their maximum potential. Most staff had completed protection of vulnerable adults training and most were also planned to attend sessions on the protection of children. This and DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 the robust policy in place will ensure that potential abuse of service users can be identified and dealt with quickly using the correct referral methods. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. The building is being maintained in a safe way, making for a welcoming environment in which to live and work. EVIDENCE: The inspector spoke to the handyman and health and safety officer as part of the inspection visit. Neither had had any difficulties in maintaining their roles in the home and felt that the Foundation had been supportive in maintaining the home. Areas had been noticeably attended to, such as the smoke room, main corridors and some bathroom areas. The dining room carpet and curtains were on the list as a major piece of work, which needed to be completed. Although some service users had indicated in the survey forms that there is sometimes an odorous smell in the home, on the tour of the building with the acting manager and two other Foundation representatives, this was not the case, at this visit. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The cleaning rota was seen and members of the cleaning staff spoken to who did not indicate there were any problems in completing their tasks. Relatives and service users spoken to felt the home was generally clean and tidy. There was an improvement around the home in the attention to detail by staff. For example trolleys of dressings etc for barrier nursing were no longer a permanent feature in corridors, when there was no need for them to be there. Bathroom areas still needed some attention and some service users were not entirely happy in the way beds were made. Staff need to be reminded that this is not their home but that of the service users and what may be acceptable in their own home environment may not be so for people they are looking after. Service users own bedroom areas had been decorated in the tastes and styles they wished. Some in a football theme and others to accommodate certain interests and hobbies. Specialist equipment such as beds and hoists, computers and special telephones were also in use and suitably maintained. This has enabled the service users and their loved ones to stamp their own identity on the home. Care is also taken and recorded at various meetings to ensure that the maintenance of communal areas is discussed and a consensus of opinion recorded for example in the choosing of the colour in the main corridor walls. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34 and 35. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgment has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. The Foundation has a robust recruitment policy and staff are trained to safely perform their jobs. EVIDENCE: Surveys were sent out to 35 staff and 18 were returned. 9 staff were spoken to on the day of the visit. It had been identified when auditing the surveys and on speaking to staff that due to some staff shortages they were not always able to complete tasks for service users as they would like to. Although they felt needs were being met the service user and relatives surveys stated that this was not always the case. This had also possible also affected communication between staff groups and the lack of recording of some issues. The staffing matrix had recently been reviewed and for the dependency of service users, when checked by the inspector, there appeared to be adequate staff on duty. How staff are deployed in different departments and how this could affect the outcomes to service users was identified to the acting manager to address. The training records had greatly improved since last time and staff stated how they had appreciated some training input into the home. Out of 68 staff, 58 had completed protection of vulnerable adult training. Most statutory training DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 had been completed and some service specific training. 33 of staff had now completed their NVQ level 2 care awards, which was nearing the target set. This will ensure that staff have up to date knowledge to look after the service users to their full potential. 2 staff files were tracked in depth and found to have the necessary documentation in the files. The recruitment policy appeared robust to ensure staff are safe to work with service users prior to employment. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39 and 42. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgment has been made from evidence gathered both during and before the visit to this service. Policies and procedures are in place to ensure that service users live in a safe environment and their views are taken in to consideration. EVIDENCE: The running of the home at the time of the visit appeared to be robust and all systems and processes put in place by the Foundation were now being adhered to by the Acting manager, an oversee manager from another home and the Area manager. Staff and service users spoke highly of the Acting manager’s recent role in the general management of the home and how she has been motivating staff to ensure all policies are adhered to. Relatives also stated that at present the current management team appeared open and transparent in their dealings with them. The inspector and Area manager discussed the future management of the home in private. The Foundation sends very detailed regulation 26 notices to the local CSCI offices and this were audited prior to the inspection. The current management DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 team are also keeping the CSCI abreast of developments in the home in the temporary absence of the Registered manager. Documented evidence was also seen to prove that the Foundation is ensuring that the home is safe to live and work in. This included the policy and procudre manual, Regional priorities document for 2006/07 and the operational plan. Each section involves all parties using the home including service users, relatives, staff and visitors both external and internal. During the temporary absence of the manager the Foundation had ensured that the local team have been well supported by head office and regional staff and more frequent visits made by the Area manager. DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 X INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 2 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 YA12 Regulation 16.2.m. Requirement The registered person must ensure that all service users social, cultural and religious needs are met at all times and these are assessed and evaluated regularly. Timescale for action 20/02/07 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 YA32 Good Practice Recommendations The manager is aware of the deadline for completion of NVA training for staff. The manager is aware of the deadline to complete her Registered manager’s award. 2. YA37 DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Hessle Area Office First Floor, Unit 3 Hesslewood Country Office Park Ferriby Road Hessle HU13 0QF 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 DS0000002805.V315148.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - 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!