Inspection on 15/04/05 for Summerhill

This inspection was carried out on 15th April 2005.

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 made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Summerhill 29/04/09

Summerhill 19/08/08

Summerhill 29/08/07

Summerhill 02/05/06

Summerhill 12/10/05

Summerhill 29/11/04

Summerhill 12/07/04

Similar services:

Fairfields Country Rest Home

Poldhu

Queensmount

Trevaylor Manor

Didsbury Court Rest Home

Belma

Hunters Care Centre

Manor Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Summerhill 46 Glenwood Road West Moors Ferndown BH22 0ER Lead Inspector Gill Kennedy Unannounced 15 April 2005 10:00 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Summerhill Address 46 Glenwood Road, West Moors, Ferndown, Dorset, BH22 0ER Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 01202 870935 summerhillwestmoors@hotmail.com Mrs D K Farrar CRH 15 Category(ies) of OP - 15 registration, with number of places Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 29 November 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Summerhill is registered as a care home with the Commission for Social Care Inspection to accommodate up to fifteen older people. The home is situated in a quiet residential area at West Moors. There is a short level walk to local shops and a bus route serving the nearby towns of Poole and Bournemouth runs along the main street of West Moors. The home is detached and set in its own well-maintained grounds with a private garden at the rear of the property. All the rooms provided are single, with en-suite facilities. The home has a passenger lift to the first floor. There is a service users lounge, which overlooks the garden and a small quiet room adjacent to this. There is a separate dining room. Mrs Farrar runs Summerhill with the aid of her husband and they live with their family in the home. The couple aim to provide a homely environment and are actively involved in the day-to-day management of the home. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection had been conducted as part of the normal inspection process legally required. During the inspection Mrs Farrar made herself available throughout the day and was helpful and co-operative. Three residents were seen privately to discuss their views about life in the home and the services provided. During the inspection a relative of a resident was also seen in private and a discussion also took place with a new staff member who is taking on the role of Deputy Manager. The time taken on this inspection was 5.75 hours and 14 standards were considered. CSCI comment cards were left at the home for residents, relatives and professionals to complete to ascertain their views about the services provided at the home. At the time of writing this report 5 replies had been received 4 from residents and 1 from a relative. The terms resident and service user used in this report are interchangeable. What the service does well: Mrs Farrar works hard to create an informal, homely environment and is much in evidence, talking with and encouraging residents to keep as active as possible. There is a core of staff who have been at Summerhill for a number of years and know the residents well, this provides some continuity of care. There are regular social activities, and outings are arranged to places of interest and shows, usually musicals which residents say they enjoy. Recently a replacement vehicle has been purchased to take residents out, although an outing to a show had to be cancelled in February due to both residents and staff suffering from a flu bug. As the weather improves ad hoc outings as well as prior arranged activities in the mini bus will be organised. Residents are encouraged to express their views and concerns both individually and in the regular residents meetings where minutes are taken and it was apparent in discussions with them they would feel confident in approaching the proprietor if they had any concerns. Residents also indicated that staff were caring and treated them in a dignified way when providing personal care or Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 6 entering their rooms. One person commented on the home ‘It suits me in every way’ and another resident said ‘Everyone is kind – I like living here’. Visitors are made to feel welcome in the home and this was confirmed in discussion with residents and a visitor plus seeing comments from people who had recently written to Mrs Farrar expressing appreciation for the care given to their relatives. One person said ‘Thank you for your care and friendship shown both to residents and relatives’. Residents seen during the inspection and those replying to CSCI comment cards expressed satisfaction with the food provided and it was noted that meals were taken in congenial surroundings and were unhurried. The bedrooms and communal areas seen during this inspection were found to be clean and comfortable and individual rooms are personalised to suit residents’ tastes. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: More detailed information could be supplied on care plans to guide staff as to what actions they need to take when providing care. Mrs Farrar says that because staff and residents know each other well this information tends to be passed on verbally, but this could place new staff at a disadvantage when delivering care and relies too heavily on close verbal communication. A requirement made on the last inspection to put in place risk assessments on Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 7 care plans with particular regard to preventing falls had still not been addressed. All accidents need to be recorded appropriately and there was a failure to do this. A requirement was made on the last inspection with regard to staff needing current Moving and Handling Certificates and this training has still not been updated and could place service users and staff at risk. Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The full report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 3 Detailed information is sought prior to admission; the proprietor would make residents aware she is able to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: A lot of time was spent with Mrs Farrar talking about her admissions process. She knows the type of residents that would be unsuitable for Summerhill and had declined to accommodate people whose needs she would be unable to meet. Two current residents were on respite and their files were seen, both had assessments, one compiled by the home and the other from a community care assessment completed by Social Services. A service user who was being admitted for respite in August 2005 has a very limited, specialised diet and Mrs Farrar explained that she is seeking detailed information from the carer regarding this person’s needs and considering how she will meet them. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7,8 and 10 Care plans do not always provide sufficient information. Service users medical needs are met and ancillary services accessed appropriately. The residents are treated with respect and their dignity is maintained. EVIDENCE: Three care plans were seen during this inspection. There were gaps in the information recorded with a lack of detail about residents’ mental state and social needs. There was also one service user whose social service care plan indicated that he/she was at risk of falling and there was no evidence of the home undertaking a falls risk assessment. Another care plan said of resident ‘A little wobbly – need to be checked’, but there was no guidance for staff on how this should be managed nor a falls risk assessment, despite a requirement being made on the last inspection. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 11 The home relates to three local surgeries. There are no residents suffering with pressure sores. Access is obtained to other specialist services including chiropody of which Mrs Farrar estimated 70 of her residents obtain NHS care, which is an unusually high number. It was arranged for one service user on respite to have a physiotherapy assessment to ensure that suitable advice and facilities would be provided when he/she returned home. Residents access local dentists and opticians and where they do not have the support of families Mrs Farrar would take them if they needed assistance. The Service Users Guide indicates a commitment from the proprietor that staff are expected to treat residents with respect and dignity. Mrs Farrar re-affirms the importance of this in discussions with staff. Feedback from residents indicated that they felt they were treated respectfully. One person said that ‘Everything was done for the benefit or residents’ and the proprietor was very fussy about the type of staff she would employ. Residents were well turned out and said that that their laundry is returned within 24 hours. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12,13 and 15. There are social activities available on a daily basis, and consultation goes on with residents to ensure that the programme meets the expectations and preferences of residents. Visitors are made welcome to the home and see residents in private. Menus supplied indicated that a wholesome and appealing diet is provided. EVIDENCE: There are activities in the home each afternoon that include bingo, dominos, quiz games, quoits and old mementoes are shown to residents to stimulate discussions. The home has a culture of taking residents out to shows and places of interest. This had been curtailed due to transport problems, but the home has now bought a replacement mini bus and outings will be planned for the Summer months. Residents felt free to join activities, just sit and relax in the lounge or spend time in their rooms as they wished. Information provided to residents on admission indicates that visitors are welcome at ‘any reasonable time’. One visitor confirmed that she always felt welcome when coming to the home. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 13 Mrs Farrar aims to be flexible when providing menus and consults with residents on a weekly basis. The four residents who completed comment cards said they liked the food and this was echoed in discussions during the inspection. There were six residents who were diabetic and it was noted on one care plan seen during the inspection that clear information was recorded on how to manage this service user and guidance was also provided to relatives to elicit their co-operation in the management of diabetic diets. The menus supplied indicated a varied and nutritious diet was provided. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 Systems are in place for service users to express their views if they have a complaint. EVIDENCE: Residents are provided with written information on the complaints procedure and this was confirmed in discussion with them. In practice residents would see Mrs Farrar, as she has daily contact with them, if they had any concerns and one person said ‘she will sort it out’. There are also residents meetings held on a regular basis and general concerns can be raised and service users are offered the chance to see the proprietor in private if they wish. There have been no complaints made either to the home or CSCI since the last inspection. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19,25 and 26 The home is well maintained. The home is clean and comfortable, with rooms personalised to suit residents’ individual preferences. EVIDENCE: There is an annual development plan, a copy of which has been supplied to CSCI. A record was also seen of minor works and repairs, which are undertaken on an ad hoc basis. The services of a gardener/handyman have been obtained to assist with the ongoing maintenance of the property. The grounds are safe and tidy and the rear garden had recently been cut back and was looking inviting with some shrubs in bloom. Detailed risk assessments are in place, as neither radiator covers nor low temperature surfaces are supplied, apart from in one bedroom where a risk assessment indicated this was needed and a cover had been fitted. Risk Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 16 assessments should be reviewed regularly and there was no evidence on them of a review date. All areas of the home seen on the day of the inspection were found to be clean and hygienic. The laundry was not seen on this occasion, but has previously met the required standard. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 29 The staff files seen on this inspection indicated that recruitment practices were satisfactory. EVIDENCE: On the last inspection a requirement was made as staff had only obtained standard CRB checks and not the enhanced check required for all care workers in direct contact with residents. Three staff files were read during this inspection and all had the required enhanced CRB checks. An additional CRB check for another staff member was also seen and this was in order. Mrs Farrar demonstrated that enhanced checks were being obtained for the rest of her staff and she anticipated these would all be returned by the end of May. The job application form that candidates are asked to complete does not specify that people must clearly record their length of time in a post, and the dates of beginning and leaving a job, so that any gaps in employment can be explored during the interview process. The inspector discussed this with Mrs Farrar and she agreed she would consider amending her form. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 18 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 32 and 37,38. The proprietor creates an open and positive atmosphere and seeks residents’ views. Record keeping in relation to recording accidents needs to be improved. The home is unable to demonstrate that service users and staff are fully protected. EVIDENCE: From observation, talking with residents, looking at the minutes of residents meetings and discussion with Mrs Farrar the conclusion was reached that the home is run in an open and inclusive way. The member of staff seen also positively commented upon the support and guidance she was being offered. A new accident recording system had been implemented in the home, and during this period of transition there were gaps in recording. An example was Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 19 seen in that daily records showed that one resident had fallen on two occasions neither of which had been recorded in the new accident book. There is appropriate testing and servicing of equipment and all staff have fire training on a three monthly basis. The safety of residents and staff is not assured, as the home has still not addressed a requirement that has now been made on three previous inspections. This is that all care staff must have current moving and handling certificates. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 20 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. Where there is no score against a standard it has not been looked at during this inspection. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 x x x x N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 x 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 x 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 x 29 3 30 x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x x x 3 x x x x 2 1 Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 21 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 7 Regulation 13 Requirement Timescale for action 15.07.05 2. 37 17 Schedule 3 12 3. 38 Risk assessments must meet relevant clinical and include a risk assessment with particular attention to the prvention of falls. (Timescale 31.01.05 not met.) Records must be kept for service 15.06.05 users of any accident and this must include whether medical treatment was required and what action was taken. The care home must be 15.06.05 conducted to promote and make proper provision for the health and welfare of service usersThis must include being able to evidence that all staff have current Moving and Handling certificates.(Timescale 31.01.05 not met and carried forward from three inspections.) 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 Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 22 1. 25 Risk assessments for radiators should have the next review date on them. Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Unit 4, New Fields Business Park Stinsford Road Poole BH17 0NF 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 Summerhill Version 1.10 Page 24 - 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!