Inspection on 03/12/07 for Tansley House

This inspection was carried out on 3rd December 2007.

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

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

Tansley House 17/11/08

Tansley House 06/12/06

Tansley House 26/01/06

Tansley House 23/08/05

Tansley House 03/03/05

Tansley House 27/09/04

Tansley House 17/09/03

Similar services:

Byars Care Home

St Marys Nursing Home

Bramble Lodge

Parkmanor Residential Home

Thornham Grove

Hunter`s Lodge

London Road Neurological and Specialist Care Unit

Carlton Care Home

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Tansley House Church Street Tansley Matlock Derbyshire DE4 5FE Lead Inspector Rose Veale Unannounced Inspection 3rd December 2007 09:30 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Tansley House Address Church Street Tansley Matlock Derbyshire DE4 5FE (01629) 580404 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) Mr Alan Baranowski Mr Steve Lomax, Mrs Janet Baranowski Beverley Sarah Windle Care Home 20 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (20) of places Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 6th December 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Tansley House is a well established care home registered for 20 older people who need help with personal care. The home provides pleasant, homely accommodation in 18 single rooms and one shared room. In practice the home usually accommodates 19 residents with the shared room being used if required by a married couple. There is a choice of lounges, a separate dining area and use of the garden. The home is situated in the centre of Tansley village. Information about the home, including CSCI inspection reports, is available in the main entrance area of the home, or from the registered manager. The fees range from £340 - £355 per week, depending on the assessed needs of the resident. This information was provided by the registered manager on 3rd December 2007. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspection visit was unannounced and took place over 5½ hours. The inspection visit focused on assessing compliance to requirements made at the previous inspection and on assessing all the key standards. There were 19 people accommodated in the home on the day of the inspection visit. People living in the home, visitors and staff were spoken with during the visit. The registered manager was available and helpful throughout the inspection visit. Some people were unable to contribute directly to the inspection process because of communication difficulties, but they were observed during the visit to see how well their needs were met by staff. Records were examined, including care records, staff records, maintenance, and health and safety records. The Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA) had been completed and returned prior to the inspection and information from this has been included in this report. Surveys were sent out to people living in the home and their relatives prior to the inspection visit. 10 completed surveys were returned and information from these has been included in this report. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Some of the requirements and most of the recommendations made at the last inspection had been met. This had resulted in improvements to information for people living in the home, care plans, safe-handling of medication, and staff induction and training. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1, 3 and 6 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There was a full needs assessment and sufficient information provided so that people were confident the home was able to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: The Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide had been reviewed and updated since the last inspection to include all the required information. A visitor spoken with said they had been given a copy of the Service User Guide when their relative was admitted to the home. Most of the survey responses said that people had received sufficient information about the home to make a choice about living there. The AQAA says that people “have a full assessment prior to admission to ensure that the level of care that we can provide is appropriate”. Also, that people are “given the opportunity to visit and assess the home prior to Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 admission, stay a day, couple of days or a week without obligation to stay on a permanent basis.” The care records of 3 people were seen. Each included assessment information obtained before and after admission to the home. As noted in the AQAA, new documentation had been introduced since the last inspection to ensure all areas of the person’s life were covered in the assessment. There was information from Social Services for people whose care was funded by the local authority. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys confirmed that the home was able to meet their personal care needs. Standard 6 did not apply to this home. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Improvements had been made to ensure a consistent approach to care planning so that people’s individual needs and preferences were met. EVIDENCE: At the previous inspection in December 2006, the care records were found to be lacking in detail and had not been regularly reviewed. The AQAA said that all documentation regarding care planning and assessment had been fully reviewed in the last 12 months. Also that, “the review has ensured that the procedures are better than before and the documentation processes are full and complete.” At this inspection it was seen that care records were better organised and documentation had improved. The care plans had sufficient detail to ensure people’s care needs and personal preferences were clear to staff. There were references to ensuring the person’s choices were respected and to maintaining Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 their privacy, dignity and independence. The care plans covered all areas of the person’s life. Each person had a keyworker who reviewed the care plan every month. The care plans were re-written and updated every 6 months. The older versions of care plans were left in the care records, potentially causing confusion. There were records completed by the keyworkers at least 3 or 4 times per week about each person’s progress and condition. Records were made daily if there were changes in the person’s condition. The records were detailed and informative. It was not clear that people living in the home and / or their representatives were involved in care planning. Care plans were not signed by the person and/or their representative to indicate their involvement and agreement. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys were not all aware of the care plans and had not always been fully involved. However, the majority of people felt that their needs were fully met at the home. Staff spoken with were knowledgeable about the care needs and preferences of people living in the home. Staff training records and information from the AQAA showed that staff had received training to ensure they could meet the needs of people living in the home. The healthcare needs of people were assessed and the assessments regularly reviewed. The assessments included oral health, pressure areas, nutritional needs, and mental health. There were records of the input of other healthcare professionals, such as GP, District Nurse, chiropodist and optician. There was evidence that people were promptly and appropriately referred for support and treatment. For example, a person with some difficulties in eating was seen by the Speech and Language Therapist; a person noted in the keyworker records to be feeling unwell was seen by the GP the same day and treatment started for a chest infection. People spoken with and those who commented in the surveys felt that they were treated with respect, and their privacy and dignity maintained. People responding to the surveys said staff always listened to them and acted on what they said. People commented that staff were “kind”, “friendly”, and “nothing is too much trouble”. Staff were observed to have a warm and sensitive approach to people. Medication was stored securely in trolleys secured to the wall in the dining room. Since the last inspection, the Temazepam was stored and recorded as a controlled drug, as recommended. Medication records were correctly completed and included records of all medication received into the home. 1 person was supported to manage their own medication. All staff administering medication had received appropriate training. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14 and 15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. A good range of activities was provided and people were consulted about life in the home so that their expectations and preferences were met. EVIDENCE: People spoken with and those who responded to the surveys were mostly pleased with the lifestyle in the home. Comments included: “it’s home from home”, “ an informal homely atmosphere”, “it’s warm and welcoming”, and “I can do as I please”. The AQAA said that, “The home operates in a friendly and unregimented atmosphere” and “Residents are offered a good range of activities to meet their social and spiritual needs”. The range of activities provided included music, gentle exercises, pottery, art and craft, bingo and other games, trips out, and visiting entertainers. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys were generally satisfied with the activities offered. 1 person commented that activities were “good and Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 lively”. On the day of the inspection visit there was an arts and crafts session making Christmas cards. This was clearly enjoyed by people living in the home and by staff. There were photos displayed of activities at the home and information about planned activities. 1 person commented that they would like more trips out, and another person commented that planned activities did not always take place. The manager and 3 other staff at the home were undertaking a training course in chair-based exercise so that they would be able to run sessions at the home. Staff at the home were also taking part in training from a local charity who provided activities in the home. Individual spiritual needs and preferences were recorded in the care plans. Some people from the home regularly went to local churches and there was a regular communion service held at the home. The care records seen did not include details of the person’s social and family history, or of their past interests and hobbies. People were consulted at regular meetings in the home. Minutes of recent meetings showed that people were asked about activities, meals, routines and complaints. The manager said that relatives/friends were welcome to attend the meetings, and had attended – although this was not noted in the minutes seen. There were comments received which indicated that relatives were not aware that they were welcome to attend the meetings. Visitors spoken with said they were made welcome and could visit at any time. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys were mostly satisfied with the meals provided. Comments included: “good food”, “it’s all homemade”, and “It’s too good – I’ve put on weight!” A new menu had been devised in consultation with people living in the home. There were choices available at all meal times and the menu appeared varied. The lunch served on the day of the inspection visit looked appetising and people said they had enjoyed it. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16 and 18 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. There were gaps in the recruitment procedures so that people living in the home were not fully protected. EVIDENCE: The complaints procedure had been reviewed since the last inspection to include a timescale for responses to complaints. The complaints procedure was displayed in the main entrance area and was also included in the Service User Guide. The manager said that there had been no formal complaints received by the home since the last inspection and so there were no records. The manager said that she usually dealt with concerns or minor complaints on an individual basis, or they were raised at the regular meetings. There were no records of minor complaints. CSCI had not received any complaints about the home since the last inspection. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys were all aware of how to make a complaint. 1 person commented that they did not always feel comfortable in raising concerns with the manager or staff, as they were worried about a negative response. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Staff at the home had received training about safeguarding adults issues and procedures. Staff spoken with were aware of different types of abuse and the correct procedures to follow if allegations were made. It was found that 2 staff recruited since the last inspection had been allowed to start work without the required Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) disclosure and POVA First check in place. This did not ensure that people living in the home were fully protected. (See Staffing section of this report). Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19 and 26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was well maintained, clean and homely so that people enjoyed a pleasant and comfortable environment. EVIDENCE: People spoken with and those who responded to the surveys were generally satisfied with the environment of the home. They said it was “really homely” and “comfortable”. 2 people commented that they were pleased to have bedrooms with en-suite toilets. 1 person said they would have liked a larger room but was pleased they were able to bring in possessions from their own home. The AQAA said that “Curtains, carpets, mattresses are replaced on a rolling programme of expenditure to ensure that the quality of comfort within the Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 home is maintained” and that in the last 12 months the décor had been upgraded where required. The AQAA said that there were plans to upgrade and refurbish the bathrooms and toilets in the home, including provision of a wheelchair accessible shower in the ground floor bathroom. The manager confirmed that it was hoped this work would be completed in the next 2 months. The parts of the home seen were clean and free from offensive odours on the day of the inspection visit. People spoken with and those surveyed said the home was usually clean and fresh. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29 and 30 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Although improvements had been made, the recruitment process was not sufficiently robust to ensure that people were fully protected. EVIDENCE: On the day of the inspection visit there were 4 care assistants plus the manager on duty for the morning shift, 2 care assistants from 3.30pm to 8.30pm, then 1 waking and 1 sleeping in staff for the night shift. The manager said that staffing levels were flexible around the needs of residents and any planned activities. The rotas showed that extra staff were provided for busy times. People spoken with and those responding to the surveys said that staff were nearly always available when needed. Staff spoken with said that staffing levels were suitable to meet the needs of people living in the home. The records were seen of 2 members of staff recruited since the last inspection. Improvements had been made to meet requirements about gaps in staff records made at previous inspections. The records now included application forms with full employment history, 2 written references, a recent form of identification and a photograph as required. However, neither of the Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 records seen had a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) closure or POVA First check obtained by the home as their current employer. Both records had a CRB disclosure from a previous employer. This was brought to the attention of one of the providers who was at the home for a short period during the inspection visit. The provider said he was not aware that the CRB disclosure could not be transferred from a previous employer. At previous inspections CRB disclosures and POVA First checks were in place for other staff records seen. An Immediate Requirement was made for the home to provide evidence that the CRB disclosures had been applied for, to ensure the protection of people living in the home. The Immediate Requirement was complied with in the timescale allowed. Following the inspection visit the providers also confirmed what arrangements had been made to ensure that one member of staff without a CRB disclosure was working under supervision for a planned night shift. A letter of serious concern was sent to the providers following the inspection requiring them to confirm what action they were taking to ensure the recruitment procedures protected people living in the home. Since the last inspection a new induction programme had been introduced that met the Skills For Care standards. The induction programme had been completed for one of the new members of staff, but not started for the other one. Staff had received training in all the required areas, such as fire safety, food hygiene and manual handling. The AQAA said that all staff had received training about the control of infection. Staff had received training relevant to the needs of people living in the home, such as dementia awareness and oral health care. People who responded to the surveys said that staff were usually competent to meet their needs. Staff spoken with said that the training was good and they found it helpful. The manager said that of 9 care staff, 8 had already achieved a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) in care at Level 2 or 3, and that 1 was working towards the qualification. This exceeded the National Minimum Standard of 50 of care staff with NVQ at level 2 or above. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 and 38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was generally well run and managed appropriately so that people had confidence in the service provided. EVIDENCE: The registered manager was suitably qualified and experienced to run the home. Since the last inspection the manager and staff had completed work to comply with most of the requirements and recommendations made. Most people spoken with and those responding to the surveys were positive about the management of the home. People commented that the manager was “approachable” and “easy to get on with”. Staff were pleased that the manager had a ‘hands-on’ approach. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 The manager and one of the providers had completed the AQAA. It was returned within the agreed timescale and included all the information requested. It included detailed information about the areas the where they felt the home did well and the plans for improvement. Quality assurance measures included annual surveys sent out to people living in the home and/or their relatives. As recommended at the last inspection, a report had been produced from the findings of the surveys. The report had been made available to people living in the home and to visitors. One of the providers visited the home frequently and produced monthly reports as required. There were regular meetings for people living in the home and there was a suggestion box in the main entrance area for anyone to use. Records were seen of personal money held for people living in the home. The records seen had 2 signatures for each transaction, as recommended at the last inspection. Information from the AQAA indicated that equipment had been serviced and maintained as required, and also that policies and procedures had been reviewed in the last 12 months. As noted at the last inspection, the recommendations of the Environmental Health Officer (EHO) had not been complied with as fly screens had not been installed for the kitchen windows. The manager said that the EHO had recently visited the home and had given a short timescale for the work to be carried out. The manager was unable to confirm that work had been carried out to meet a requirement made at the last inspection about the safety of radiators at the home. Unfortunately, the provider was not available at the time of asking about the radiators. A requirement has been made in this report for the provider to send evidence to CSCI of the safety of the radiators. The manager was not fully aware of the requirement to notify CSCI of certain significant events. Written guidance was provided with a pro-forma for the manager to use to report events. As noted in the Complaints and Protection and Staffing sections of this report, there were recruitment practices that put people at risk. Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 3 17 X 18 1 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 4 29 1 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? YES STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1 Standard OP19 Regulation 13(4)(a) (c) Requirement The providers must send evidence to CSCI that the radiators identified in the risk assessment undertaken by the home have been made safe. All matters identified by the Environmental Health Officer must be attended to within the timescales allowed. This will ensure the health and safety of people living in the home. Previous timescale 31/03/06 Staff must not be employed at the home unless all the required information and documents have been obtained as detailed in Schedule 2. Specifically, CRB disclosures and POVA First checks. This will ensure the protection of people living in the home. Previous timescale 30/01/07 CSCI must be notified of deaths, illness and other events as detailed. This will help to ensure people are protected and their health and safety promoted. Timescale for action 30/01/08 2 OP19 16(2)(j) 31/01/08 3 OP29 19(1)(b) (c) 31/12/07 4 OP38 37 31/12/07 Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 OP7 Good Practice Recommendations The person living in the home, or their representative, should sign the care plan to indicate their involvement and agreement and to ensure their personal preferences are accurately reflected in the plan. There should be daily entries in the care records of people living in the home to ensure current information about their condition and progress. The care records should include details of the person’s social and family history, and their previous and present hobbies and interests. This will help to ensure that activities are offered to meet their needs and preferences. A washing machine with a sluice cycle should be provided to minimise the risk of spread of infection from soiled bedding and clothes. 2 3 OP7 OP12 4 OP26 Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Derbyshire Area Office Cardinal Square Nottingham Road Derby DE1 3QT 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 Tansley House DS0000020103.V347618.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - 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!