Inspection on 11/06/07 for Strawberry Fields

This inspection was carried out on 11th June 2007.

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 found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 2 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Strawberry Fields 16/01/06

Strawberry Fields 20/09/05

Strawberry Fields 04/01/05

Strawberry Fields 03/08/04

Similar services:

Thorndene

Insight - Eastchurch

Southfields

Magenta

Seabourne House

33 St John`s Church Road

Dovedale Court

1 Marten Road

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Strawberry Field Courtwick Lane Wick Littlehampton West Sussex BN17 7PD Lead Inspector Nick Morrison Unannounced Inspection 11th June 2007 09:30 DS0000052523.V339726.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 DS0000052523.V339726.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. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Strawberry Field Address Courtwick Lane Wick Littlehampton West Sussex BN17 7PD 01903 733395 01306 870230 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) Corich Community Care Limited Miss Susan Anne Hooper Care Home 10 Category(ies) of Learning disability (10), Mental disorder, registration, with number excluding learning disability or dementia (10) of places DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. 4. Up to 10 male and/or female service users between the ages of 18 and 65 years in the category of learning disability may be accommodated. No persons under 18 years of age or over 65 years of age may be admitted. Up to 6 male and/or female service users between the ages of 18 and 65 years in the category of mental disorder (MD) may be accommodated. A maximum of ten service users may be accommodated. Date of last inspection 16th January 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Strawberry Field is registered to accommodate up to ten people with a learning disability aged between 18-65. The home is situated in Wick, Littlehampton on a shared site with another home belonging to the same organisation. It is a purpose built home with all residents’ accommodation on the ground floor. There is a large lounge and two small dining rooms as well as substantial outside space. All bedrooms are single occupancy and have en-suite facilities. The premises are some way from local amenities although the home has it’s own transport. Attached to the home is a building used for recreational and educational activities that is shared with two other homes belonging to Corrich Community Care Ltd. Current fees for the home are between £2312.81 and £2578.22 per week. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This report represents a review of all the evidence and information gathered about the service since the previous inspection. This included a site visit that occurred on11th June 2007 and lasted nine hours. During this time the Inspector toured the premises, looked at the files of four service users and observed the service people were getting. The Inspector also met with the Manager and interviewed two members of staff and observed interaction between staff and service users. All records and relevant documentation referred to in the report was seen on the day of the inspection visit. The Inspector also referred to service’s own self-assessment of the home and spoke with three parents and two Care Managers. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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 DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from having their needs and aspirations assessed prior to moving into the home. EVIDENCE: The home requires a full care management assessment for each person before they move into the home. In addition to this, the home does it’s own comprehensive assessment. Records showed that all assessments were in place prior to the person moving in and that the Manager of the home had met with people at their previous residence to carry out the home’s assessment. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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. 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 using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from having clear care plans and risk assessments in place and from being supported to make their own decisions. EVIDENCE: Individual care plans were in place for each person living in the home and were clearly related to the initial assessment and the ongoing information the home had gathered on each person over time. The plans were well written and explained not only what staff needed to do in order to support people well, but also the reasons why. Staff spoken with were clear about individual care plans and had all signed to say they had read and understood them. Care Managers and parents spoken with said they were involved in the care planning process and that the home kept them informed of changes to the plans as they occurred. Each person had a review once or twice DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 a year and parents and Care Managers were involved in these and were able to contribute to the care planning process. The home is planning to introduce a system of person centered planning to ensure that care plans are, as far as possible, based on the aspirations of people who use the service. Most people living in the home have limited communication skills. This is recognised within care plans and there was information about the way each person communicated, what things were important to them and how they needed to be supported to make decisions for themselves. There had been input from speech and language therapists. Staff spoken with were clear about each person’s communication methods and the importance of enabling people to make decisions for themselves. Staff training supported this and emphasised the need for people to be in control of their own lives as far as possible. The service used pictures, symbols and photographs to support people to make decisions for themselves. Risk assessments were clearly written and reviewed on a regular basis. Staff spoken with were clear about risk assessments for each person and the importance of supporting people in line with the risk assessments. Risk assessments were used to promote independence and support people living in the home to be involved safely in the activities they wanted to do. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from having their rights respected and from balanced and nutritious meals. They also benefit from having the opportunity to engage in a wide range of activities both inside and outside of the home. EVIDENCE: People living in the home each have a timetable of activities which, from observation throughout the inspection visit, were followed. Staff support was managed so that each person had the necessary support to do the activities they wanted to do. From observation it was also clear that people were able to choose whether or not to take part in the activities offered to them. The home also has an activity centre attached to it which is used by people in the home as well as by people who live in other homes owned by the same organisation. Facilities in the centre include a sports hall, computers and cooking facilities. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Activities on offer to people in the home included fitness, art, trampolining, aromatherapy, foot massage, cookery, reading, puzzles/games, football, basketball and music sessions. On the day of the inspection visit there was a music session facilitated by a musician bought in by the company. It was a very active session where people living in the home were encouraged and supported to be actively involved. People observed during the session appeared to be enjoying it very much. Within each individual activity plan there were risk assessments and behavioural guidelines so that staff knew how to support people effectively and safely in the activity. There was also a system for recording for each activity and guidelines for staff on how to do this. Good records were kept of each activity, including the extent to which people appeared to enjoy it. These were used in planning future activities. Although people living in the home had always been supported to take part in activities outside the home, this had been increased over the previous year and people were going out more. Staff spoken with said that this meant that more people were spending more time doing the things they wanted to do outside the home. Staff support for these activities was well managed and good risk assessments were in place to ensure that staffing was adequate and that plans were in place to support people safely. Staff spoken with said they felt that the problematic behaviours had decreased as a direct result of people being to supported to go out more. There was a lot of support for people living in the home to maintain contact with their families. The visiting policy promoted and encouraged visitors. People living in the home were supported to telephone their families whenever they wanted to and were able to do this private. Staff in the home did arrange transport for some people to be able to go and visit their families. Records showed that people had regular contact with their families and this was confirmed by family members spoken with. Food in the home was of good quality and people observed during the inspection visit appeared to enjoy their meal. The menu’s showed that the diet was varied and nutritious. Individual preferences were recorded so that people did not have food they didn’t like. The home has a main dining area and a separate, quieter dining area for those people who wanted it. There were sufficient staff support throughout the mealtime and staff tried to ensure that mealtimes were an enjoyable time for people living in the home. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 and 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from having their healthcare needs met and are protected by the home’s medication policies and practices. EVIDENCE: Care plans contained information on how people preferred to be supported with their personal care. The files of people living in the home demonstrated that healthcare needs were monitored and that people were supported to use healthcare services as necessary. There had been a recommendation from the previous inspection that a record should be made of any action taken following concerns about a resident’s health. Records showed that staff in the home were now doing this fully. There were comprehensive records relating to each person’s health. Each person had a comprehensive Healthcare Assessment and all identified areas of health needs were monitored and recorded on a regular basis. Where people had used healthcare services there were records detailing the time and date, the reason why they attended and any outcomes as a result of the consultation. Staff in the home liaised closely with healthcare professionals in the interests of people living in the home. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 The system for administering medication in the home was clear and was stated in the home’s policies. Staff spoken with who were involved in administering medication said they had received good training and demonstrated that they had a good understanding of medication issues. Medication records were clear and up-to-date and all medication was stored appropriately and safely. Although many people living in the home had been prescribed various ‘as and when necessary’ medications to control very difficult behaviour in unsafe situations, it was clear from the records that this kind of medication was very rarely used. The Manager and individual staff spoken with were clear that such medication was very much a last resort and they were clear about a range of other interventions for working with difficult behaviours rather than resorting to the use of medication. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 and 23 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from having their views listened to but are not fully protected by the way the home manages their finances. EVIDENCE: The service generally did a good job of protecting people living in the home. There were clear policies in place covering complaints, whistleblowing and protecting vulnerable adults. Staff spoken with were clear about these policies and they had been covered in-depth during their induction training and throughout further training on specific topics. The complaints policy had been put into a format designed to be more accessible to people living in the home and parents spoken with confirmed they had received a copy of the policy and were clear about how to make a complaint if they felt the need to. There was a clear system in place for recording and responding to complaints, but no complaints had been received over the past twelve months. There was a record on each person’s file of the personal property they had in the home. The service took adult protection issues seriously and had demonstrated this in the past by reporting concerns in the correct way. One person who used to live in the home no longer lives there because of attacks on another person living there. This was reported and was resolved by the person being given notice to leave the home. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 One Care Manager spoken with said she felt the home did very well in protecting people who lived there. Physical restraint had been used in the home, to ensure the safety of people living there. Staff had all received training in using physical restraint appropriately. As with the use of medication to control specific behaviour, the use of physical restraint was very rare. Each person who might need to be physically restrained had a specific care plan in place detailing how and in what circumstances this might need to be used. These care plans, along with the home’s policy on restraint, promoted the rights of people living in the home and were clear of the need for those rights to be protected. This was further reinforced through the training staff received. Staff spoken with understood the issues surrounding the use of physical restraint and spoke enthusiastically and knowledgeably about alternative interventions they might use to deal with difficult behaviour. The system for managing the finances of people who live in the home involves the Director of the organisation being the appointee for each person. They each have bank accounts that are managed at the organisation’s head office. Information about their accounts is passed from head office to the home. Each person living in the home has their own cash point card so that they are able to withdraw money from their account as necessary. The cash they each have is kept in the home in a personal cash-box. All the cash-boxes are kept in a locked cupboard in the main office and access to them is restricted to the manager and each shift leader. There is a system in place for recording and monitoring the amount of money each person should have in their cash-box. As money is taken out and spent, it is recorded and a running balance is kept. Each item of expenditure should also have a corresponding receipt wherever possible. The Inspector looked at the records and cash-boxes for two people during the inspection. Both of these showed discrepancies between the amount of money the person should have had in the cash-box and the amount they actually did have. There were also occasions where there were no receipts for expenditure in outlets that provide a receipt as a matter of course. The recording sheets were difficult to follow as they contained entries that had been crossed out or corrected by overwriting. This was compounded by the fact that the records were not chronologically sequential. The reason for this appeared to be that staff would take money with the intention of buying things for a person on their behalf and would take up to two weeks to eventually purchase the items, bring the money and receipt back and record the expenditure. The information from head office about each person’s expenditure was brief and did not enable the Manager of the home to check that the records they DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 had in the home of withdrawals made from each person’s account corresponded with the bank statement. Records also showed that people living in the home are expected to pay for staff to support them in the community. Wherever people have gone out for meals, drinks or have had to pay entrance money (e.g. for bowling or the cinema) they have had to buy food and drink and pay the entrance costs for the staff supporting them. The Inspector was informed that the home had always operated in this way. Some people living in the home require a lot of staff support when they are out in the community; some were paying for up to three staff to eat or drink, or both, each time they went out and were paying entrance fees as well. While the fact that people are being supported to access community facilities is a positive thing, consideration needs to be given to necessity of this expenditure for individuals. The Statement of Purpose, Service User Guide and contract of Terms & Conditions do not explicitly highlight that people living in the home will be expected to pay for the cost of staff supporting them in the community. The Care Managers spoken with explained that they were not aware of these costs for people they had placed in the home. People using the service, their parents and representatives were not able to make a fully informed choice about those costs before signing the contract and had not been consulted on this expenditure since signing the contract. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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. 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 using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from living in a clean, comfortable and safe environment. EVIDENCE: The home was purpose-built about three years ago and designed to provide a stimulating, safe and comfortable environment for people. Some parts of the building are now beginning to show signs of wear, but the service has a decoration plan in place to deal with this. They also employ a maintenance person to deal with the upkeep of the building. The service aims to maintain a homely feeling in the house and the furniture and fittings are domestic and comfortable. The service employs separate domestic staff and the home was kept clean throughout. Clear infection control policies were in place and staff spoken with DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 were aware of these and of the need to maintain a comfortable and appealing environment for people living in the home. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34 and 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from being supported by adequate numbers of welltrained staff and are protected by the home’s recruitment policies and practices. EVIDENCE: Staff training records showed that people working in the home received a wide range of training opportunities relevant to their work. Fifty-three per cent of the staff have an NVQ2 or equivalent. Training courses covered areas such as risk assessment, abuse, equality and diversity, epilepsy, dementia, mental health, sight loss, food hygiene, health and safety, nutrition and health and manual handling. Staff spoken with were knowledgeable and demonstrated skills and understanding in working with people who have a learning disability. They also reported that the training they received was informative and interesting. Training needs were formally identified with the line manager and they were also supported to attend other courses that came up which they had a DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 particular interest in. The home has a three monthly training plan in place. The organisation has appointed a training manager to ensure that all staff are receiving all the training they need. Rota’s showed that there were sufficient staff on duty at all times. Staffing on each shift consisted of six or seven care staff along with the manager, cook, domestic staff and the activities coordinator. In addition to this, there was oneto-one staffing for those people who needed it. The home does not use any agency staff; staff absences are filled by other staff working additional hours. Staff spoken with and observed during the inspection visit were conscientious, enthusiastic, skilled and focussed on the needs of people living in the home. Recruitment records demonstrated that staff are not employed in the home without all necessary checks being in place, including references, Criminal Records Bureau check and POVA First check. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 and 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users benefit from living in a well-managed home that is safe and responsive to their needs, other than the inappropriate management of of service users’ finances discussed earlier in this report. EVIDENCE: The Manager of the home is registered and has demonstrated that she has the skills, knowledge and training to manage the service. Staff, parents and Care Managers spoken with during the inspection process spoke highly of the Manager saying that she was supportive and responded to issues well. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 In discussion the Manager was able to demonstrate that she has a clear understanding of the issues within the home and is able to manage them effectively. She also has developmental plans in place for the home. There had been a requirement from the previous inspection that the quality assurance measures should be developed. This has been addressed and the organisation has comprehensive quality assurance processes in place. These include internal audits, questionnaires for people who live in the home and their representatives, staff involvement, Directors’ reports and audits of the service by other home managers in the organisation. Health and safety is well-managed in the home. All equipment is serviced and checked regularly, maintenance issues are dealt with, incidents and accidents are recorded and regularly audited and good workplace risk assessments were in place. There were no outstanding health and safety issues in the home at the time of the inspection. DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 2 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 X 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 3 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 2 X X 3 X DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 YA1 Regulation 4 Requirement The home’s Statement of Purpose, Service User Guide and contract of Terms & Conditions must be explicit about the exact financial arrangements for people living in the home. The Registered Manager must review the system for managing service users’ finances, including: - ensuring the information in the home on service users’ bank deposits and withdrawals is comprehensive, up-to-date and accurate. - ensuring the records of day to day expenditure are accurate, up-to-date and that expenditure is accounted for with receipts. - ensuring that the records of expenditure correlate with the amount of money each person has. - ensuring that, if service users are expected to make any payments for staff to support them in the community, decisions about this are made with input from the service user, DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 31/07/07 2 YA23 20 31/07/07 Version 5.2 Page 25 where possible, and from the representatives of the service user, including parents and Care Managers RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations DS0000052523.V339726.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Hampshire Office 4th Floor Overline House Blechynden Terrace Southampton SO15 1GW 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 DS0000052523.V339726.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!