Inspection on 27/06/07 for The Anchorage

This inspection was carried out on 27th 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 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

The Anchorage 12/10/06

The Anchorage 12/10/05

The Anchorage 06/07/05

The Anchorage 09/12/04

The Anchorage 17/06/04

Similar services:

2 Perhaver Park

The Vicarage

St George`s

5 Seafield Road

Credence House

Radfords

Honeybourne House

32 Beaumont Way

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 The Anchorage 47 Abbotsham Road Bideford Devon EX39 3AF Lead Inspector Andy Towse Unannounced Inspection 27th June 2007 10:00 The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.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 The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.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. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The Anchorage Address 47 Abbotsham Road Bideford Devon EX39 3AF 01237 421002 01237 421002 jeddinternational@yahoo.co.uk 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) Jedd International Ltd. Mrs Donna May Bell Care Home 9 Category(ies) of Learning disability (9) registration, with number of places The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. 3. This variation allows the admission of one named person, aged 16 years, in the category of Learning Disability (LD). The maximum number of placements including that of the named service user will remain at 9. On the termination of the placement of the named service user, the registered person will notify the Commission and the particulars and conditions of this registration will revert to those held on the 28 November 2005 12th October 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: The Anchorage is a large, older type property situated within easy access of the facilities available at Bideford. It is registered to accommodate up to 9 people who have a learning disability. All residents are accommodated in single occupancy bedrooms. All communal facilities, such as the lounge, kitchen and dining area are situated on the ground floor, enabling them to be accessed by residents with restricted mobility. The home has garden areas which are accessible to all residents. Copies of previous CSCI inspection reports are kept in the office of the home and displayed on the noticeboard of the home. The home’s scale of fees ranges from £380 to £1,300 per week. Additional charges are levied for toiletries, clothing, hair dressing and chiropody. Residents who receive day care from the private day care service part fund this themselves. Fees are also charged for private IT lessons one resident has arranged. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection. It took place over a period of seven hours. During that time there was a tour of the premises and discussion with the manager and individually, two staff members. Five residents were spoken to individually and there was observation of interaction between staff and residents. Prior to the inspection additional information had been obtained from an assessment compiled by the manager and from questionnaires completed by three residents. The inspection comprised a site visit, the aforementioned discussions and examination of policies, procedures and record keeping within the home. What the service does well: The Anchorage operates a very comprehensive and resident focused admission procedure. This was shown to take place over a prolonged period of time allowing the prospective resident to be fully assessed before being admitted. In addition, the frequent visits to the home allowed the prospective resident to meet existing residents and view the home and thereby make an informed choice about whether to become resident there. Residents are involved in the compilation of their care plans and there is an effective key worker system in operation. Relatives are encouraged to be involved in the home and are invited to reviews and their opinions sought in the home’s Quality Audit. Residents are encouraged to take part in education, training and fulfilling activities, either at the local college or private day centre. Within the home they take responsibility for their own rooms. Staff are respectful of resident’s rights to privacy and are aware of their rights to independence, dignity, choice and fulfilment. Menus are planned taking into consideration the choices of residents. Residents are safeguarded by appropriate medication administration, recording and storing procedures. The home has an appropriate and well publicised complaints procedure with residents saying they were confident in approaching the management if they had any issues they wanted to discuss. Residents had personalised rooms and the home is suitable to meet their needs. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Staff recruitment, with use of appropriate police checks, references, interview and confirmation of identity ensures only suitable staff are employed and thereby protects residents. The staff receive relevant training, a lot of which is in-house and devised by the proprietor and manager so that it is applicable to the needs of those who reside at ‘The Anchorage.’ The manager is supported professionally by the proprietor who visits the home regularly and as well as supervising the manager, offers in-house staff training. 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. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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 The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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, 3 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. The prolonged admissions process, combined with the home’s assessment and those of relevant professionals allows for the home to ensure that they only admit residents whose needs are known and which can be met. Regular visits to the home by prospective residents ensure that they have adequate knowledge from which to make an informed choice about moving into the home permanently. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The file of the most recently admitted resident was seen as well as information regarding the admissions process contained in the assessment compiled by the registered manager. This resident’s file contained assessments completed by social services personnel and healthcare professionals which gave the home good information The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 upon which to consider the suitability of the prospective resident for admission to the home. In addition to this, the prospective resident had received regular respite care for a period of twelve months prior to being admitted permanently to the home. This had enabled the home to continually assess the needs of the person whilst also giving them the opportunity to sample the experience of living at the home and thereby enable them to make an informed choice about whether to reside there permanently. Prior to being admitted to the home, the prospective resident had assisted the key worker in drawing up a ‘person centred’ plan, to decide how his/her needs could be met after moving into the home. Records relating to another resident, and referred to in the previous inspection, showed that this home had again operated a prolonged admission process, which included visits with guardians, meals at the home and overnight and longer stays to ensure an informed choice could be made by the prospective resident and that the home, through assessments, knew that it could meet that resident’s needs. Once admitted, residents have a probabtionary period which allows for both the home to decide whether it could meet the resident’s assessed needs and for the resident to exercise his/her choice about whether to stay at ‘The Anchorage’. All residents who responded to the survey considered that they had received enough information about the home, before moving in, to enable them to decide that it was the right place for them. One response written by a resident assisted by a relative referred to ‘a long introduction before moving in permanently’ and another resident responded that he/she, ‘understood it very clearly.’ The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7 and 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents’ needs are met through ‘My Life’ personal plans which reflect their changing needs, aspirations and personal goals. Residents are assisted and encouraged to make decisions about everyday life. Residents are encouraged to be independent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: All residents have their own files. The files of three residents were examined. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 All files contained a ‘My Life’ care plan. All residents have a key worker. The key workers have responsibility for ensuring the welfare of specific residents. The key workers, with assistance from the resident for whom they have special responsibility, had drawn up care plans. Social Services staff had also been involved in drawing up the ‘My Life’care plans. These were originally handwritten but were later transcribed into the ‘widget’ formula to make them more easily understood by the resident. The ‘My life’ care plans are reviewed regularly, by the key worker and the resident concerned. The care plans contained reference to communication, activities, levels of support needed to enable a resident to make choices, manage money and take responsibility for medication, and is complete with recording of progress made by the resident. The plan sets goals which are agreed with the resident and which are regularly reviewed. Changes in a resident’s life and progress made by the resident are key factors in the care plans. That residents are involved in compiling their care plans was confirmed through discussion with residents, staff and the manager and from inspecting records which had been signed by both the key worker and the resident concerned. There are instructions on files regarding the purpose of the plans and part of this states that the plan is a ‘tool to make clear the aims, wishes and dreams of the service user’ and that it should be ‘used by and for the service user with help and support from key people to ensure an improved quality of life is maintained’. In order that residents can continue to develop their independence, risk assessments were carried out. These were kept on individual residents’ files. Risk Assessments covered a wide range of possible activities which residents might be involved with. Examples of these were, access to electrical tools, ability to self medicate, and the preparation of food. As with other documentation, the risk assessments had been written in ‘widget’ format to make them more easily understood by residents. The care plans also state clearly goals which residents want to achieve and records are kept to show that these have been achieved or, in cases where they have not, what the reason is. Often the plans included individual choices such as learning to garden, learn to use a computer, going to the cinema and making contact with relatives. Of the three residents who completed pre inspection surveys, all said that they always made decisions about what they did each day, with one commenting, ’I always choose what l would like to do that’s what l like best’. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Residents are also encouraged to have a level of responsibility for their finances. To assist with this, the manager has been pro active in trying to arrange for all residents to have their own personal bank accounts. A letter written by the manager to a bank showed that she was having to advocate on behalf of one resident in order to arrange for a that person to have a bank account. A more able resident, having been assessed as having the capability to manage personal finances has a card to enable him/her to withdraw money on their own behalf. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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, 15,14, 16 and 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. Residents take part in activities which reflect both their choices and learning needs. The home encourages residents to stay in contact with friends and relatives. The ethos of the home encourages residents to maintain their in dependence. Residents enjoy a menu which reflects their individual preferences. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 At the time of the inspection none of those resident at The Anchorage was in employment. Residents however do attend a local private day centre where they participate in activities they choose. The manager has had discussions with the Day centre to ensure that the activities available are those wanted and preferred by those of her residents who choose to attend. Residents have the choice of attending courses at the local college and currently one attends full time. One resident who has an interest in computers has received private tuition. The private day centre offers activities, which have been chosen by residents either during residents’ meetings or in discussion with key workers. Examples of this are residents who want to do painting, typing or have a particular interest in music. One resident with a particular interest in painting showed us several paintings which had been completed whilst attending day care. Residents also go for trips out into the community. The minutes of Residents’ Meetings showed that trips out were part of the agenda and that residents themselves chose the venues. Examples of venues and associated activities were zoos, gardens, horse riding and swimming. The trips are arranged with the resident, often accompanied by another resident, being accompanied to their chosen destination or activity by a key worker. The home also uses specialist facilities at ‘The Calvert Trust’, where people with disabilities can participate in outdoor activities such as horse riding. In discussion residents spoke about going shopping to buy clothes accompanied by their key workers. Files contained reference to residents’ spiritual needs. One residents, who had religious beliefs important to him/her now received regular visits from a member of the clergy from that denomination. Some residents also go on holiday. The ethos which underpins this home is the ‘Principle of Normalisation’ and as such the home does not arrange institutional type holidays when all residents go together. Instead holidays, with a staff member accompanying one or two residents to a venue chosen by the resident are the norm. An example was given of a key worker accompanying a resident to see his/her relatives and latterly going by train with the resident for a holiday at a seaside resort which had been chosen by the resident. With reference to the spiritual needs of residents, those who wish can attend churches in the community and one resident has a vicar who visits the home specifically to see to his/her spiritual needs. Residents are also involved in selecting menus. This was shown in the minutes of residents’ meetings. These are held regularly and are a forum through which The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 residents are informed about what is happening in the home, but also, they are used to involve residents in the running of the home and in making decisions about the home. In order that residents can understand and access information about the meetings they are written in widget and large print, with copies displayed prominently in the dining room. The home encourages residents to retain links with family and friends. One resident regularly takes holidays with his/her family. Another spoke of relatives visiting. Discussion with the manager confirmed that other residents had links with family and friends, and in one instance a survey by a resident had been completed with assistance from a relative. Residents are all accommodated in single occupancy rooms. Residents were observed to be able to go to their rooms whenever they wished and staff were seen to respect their privacy by knocking on bedroom doors before entering. Residents were observed to be able to choose when to be alone. They have unrestricted access to all communal areas of the home Meal times are relaxed. Although the dining room is not large it affords enough space for residents and staff to sit together at meal times. Menus are chosen with reference to preferences expressed by, usually at Residents’ Meetings and which are recorded in the minutes of those meetings. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 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. EVIDENCE: In discussion all residents who were spoken to knew who their key worker was. They also understood the role of key worker. In discussion residents talked about the personal support they were offered by their key workers. This ranged from going on outings and to venues in the community, through to assistance with buying clothes, arranging for visits to the home by clergy specifically requested by one resident, through to guidance with issues relating to personal care, such, as in one instance, how to enable a resident to improve and maintain adequate oral hygiene. From discussion and observation a good rapport between one resident and his/her allocated key worke was observed. They were clearly at ease with each other. The key worker gave examples of how he/she assisted the resident with The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 improving his/her personal care, in a manner which respected the resident’s dignity. The care worker also gave other examples of how residents privacy and dignity was ensured. Staff members confirmed that part of the role of a key worker was to ensure that residents health care needs were met, including arranging and attending appointments with general practitioners, dentists and where appropriate, chiropodists. Records showed that residents had their medication reviewed annually and that they had contact with general practitioners, community nurses and other health care professionals such as dentists and chiropodists. Medication was seen to be kept securely. At the time of the inspection no resident had been prescribed controlled drugs. Whilst there is currently no provision for the storage of controlled drugs we were assured that should any resident be prescribed these, suitable storage facilities would be made available. Records showed appropriate recording of administered medication. A record is kept of all medication arriving at the home and also of that returned to the pharmacy. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 good. Residents are safeguarded by the home having appropriate policies and procedures and a staff group who are aware of issues relating to the protection of vulnerable adults. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: ‘The Anchorage’ has a written complaints procedure. It has been written in widget and in large print to make it more easily understood by residents. Information about how to make a complaint is kept on all resident’s files and is also prominently displayed in the home to ensure that residents are aware of their right to make a complaint. Responses by residents to the pre inspection survey showed that they had confidence in approaching staff, or the manager if they were not happy with the service they received and also that the residents knew how to make a complaint. One resident wrote that he/she ‘always go to my key worker she’s very good and understands me’ and another replied that he/she knew how to make a complaint and if wasn’t happy would go to, ‘my key worker, social worker or manager.’ The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 The home has appropriate policies relating to protect residents from abuse. Staff have all received training relating to the protection of vulnerable adults. (POVA). When interviewed staff gave responses which showed that they were both aware of what constituted abuse and what action they should take if they suspected that abuse was taking place. There has been no complaint made over the last twelve months. The home has appropriate financial procedures which protect residents. Finanacial records were checked regarding residents who had money held on their behalf by the home. All transactions were seen to be recorded expenditure confirmed by the use of receipts. The registered manager is aware that anyone considered unsuitable for working with vulnerable adults should be referred for possible inclusion on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults register. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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. Residents live in an environment which has an appropriate standard of hygiene and cleanliness and which meets their needs. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: ‘The Anchorage’ is an older type detached property situated in a residential area and in a convenient position for those who live there to access the facilities of Bideford. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 All those who reside there are accommodated in single occupancy bedrooms. There are sufficient bathrooms and toilets which are situated on the ground and first floor. Residents can access all areas of the home, but anyone with a profound physical disability would be restricted to the ground floor. Externally there are gardens to the front and rear of the property. The garden to the rear of the property is enclosed and can be easily accessed from either the lounge or through the kitchen. Since the last inspection the garden area to the front of the property has been made a lot more tidy. There is a written schedule for redecoration of the premises. This is being done floor by floor. Residents are involved in the redecoration programme and choose colour schemes, which not only includes repainting but the colour and design of bedding and curtains, for their rooms. Minutes on the agenda of a forthcoming Residents’ Meeting showed that residents’ views were being sought over the colour scheme for the dining room. The lounge area would be improved for residents by new furniture which was scheduled for arrival in August and upgrading of the kitchen was also planned. Furnishings are domestic in size and style. Residents clearly felt an ownership of their own rooms. Their rooms were seen to have been personalised and some had computers, CD players and pictures and ornaments of sentimental value. Two residents were seen taking responsibility for tidying their rooms and others had exercised their right to have their rooms kept in a manner which suited them. The home has an appropriate standard of hygiene and cleanliness. Whilst the home does not employ domestic staff, residents take responsibility, assisted by staff, in maintaining the cleanliness off the home. This was shown by the residents having their own cleaning rota which was on the notice board. The laundry is situated on the first floor and is therefore away from areas where food is prepared or eaten. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 , 35 and 36 Residents are protected by the homes robust recruitment procedures and a staff group who are knowledgeable about the needs of residents. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The file of a recently recruited staff member was examined. This showed that the safety of residents is ensured as no staff commence work until checks have been carried out to ensure that the person’s name has not been placed on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) register. Records showed that interviews were carried out using Equal Oportunities specifications with all prospective staff being asked the same questions. Interviews were carried out by the registered manager and the deputy manager both of whom had recently attended training courses on recruitment practices. Files contained appropriate references, Police Checks and documentation, such as birth certificates which confirm the identity of the applicant. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 All staff receive an initial induction which includes working in a supernumerary capacity for two weeks whilst being familiarised with the needs of residents, being shown around the home and being introduced to staff and residents. Staff then proceed onto the Learning Disabilities Award Framework (LDAF) Induction which is designed specifically for staff working with people who have learning disabilities. New staff also undergo a probationary period of employment, which culminates in a report of their abilities. Staff also participate in the home’s own foundation training. This includes discussion about subjects such as empowerment, choice, fulfilment and independence The home has a commitment to training and supervision. The manager is an NVQ Assessor which means she can actively be involved in the training and development of staff undertaking NVQ training at the home. As well as the foundation course which familiarises staff with the needs of people with learning disabilities, staff have also gone on courses specific to the needs of some residents, with an example being that of a course on epilepsy, and mandatory courses such as that for the Protection of vulnerable Adults. The manager holds regular staff meetings and supervision. These assist communication between staff and she also uses them to ensure that staff are knowledgeable about policies, legislation and other also training needs in general. Staff are supported by having regular supervision sessions. This was confirmed by staff in conversation and also by the rota on the office wall detailing forthcoming supervision sessions. These are formal sessions, which are recorded. In addition to this, each staff member has an annual appraisal of their work and development. Staff files also contained details of training undertaken by staff and also training which was identified as either being necessary or that which would benefit their development as people working with people with a learning disability. The home has a commitment to staff training. It does however currently only has one third of their staff with NVQ 2 qualifications when the recommended minimum number is half the staff. This is partly due to staff leaving and should be rectified shortly as two staff are currently on NVQ 2 courses with one to commence later this year. It is anticipated that in a year’s time, three quarters of the staff will have attained their NVQ level 2 qualifications. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Inspection of rotas showed that there are always at least two support workers on duty at all times. At weekends there are sometimes only two staff on duty and this can include the manager. This was discussed and we were informed that this was sufficient to meet the needs of residents as at the most there are only seven residents at the home over the weekend and sometimes less than that. The home also has a rota for staff to be ‘on call’ if additional support is necessary. Communication is promoted by regular staff meetings when the needs of residents are discussed and staff are informed about issues relating to the running of the home and also training courses. The rota however does not allow for handover sessions between shifts. Handover sessions between shifts are useful to ensure good communication with each shift being informed of important issues which have happened on previous shifts or which are ongoing and which they, in the interest of resident care, need to be aware of. The registered manager is aware that anyone considered unsuitable for working with vulnerable adults should be referred for possible inclusion on the Protection of Vulnerable Adults register. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 good. The home is well run by a manager who has the necessary experience and qualifications who is well supported by the home’s owner. Residents’ views, and those of others who have an interest in the service are sought and taken into account. Residents live in a safe environment. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 The registered manager has achieved NVQ 4 and the Registered Manager’s Award. These are the recognised qualifications for a manager of a care home. She has also been managing ‘The Anchorage’ for several years. She has also completed the NVQ Assessor’s Award which will enable her to assist in the home’s staff NVQ training. Discussion with the manager showed that she was kept up to date with changes in legislation which might affect those to whom she had a duty of care. An example of this was information regarding the Mental Capacity Act which had also been written out in a simplified format. The manager herself receives regular supervision and guidance from the proprietor who has experience within the field of learning disability. He visits every four to six weeks and forwards notes of his visits, which include reference to training, recruitment, management and health and safety issues, back to the manager. The manager is very positive about training and how this has improved her ability to run the home. She is also reviewing existing policies and redesigning much of the paperwork contained in staff and residents’ files. The registered manager holds regular staff meetings and was seen to be approachable by staff. The manager seeks out the views of residents, their relatives and associated professionals on a rotational basis. This is done so that their views can be taken into consideration in the development of the service. Surveys have been forwarded to residents and responses acted upon in 2006 and currently questionnaires have been forwarded to eight sets of relatives of which five have responded. Later in the year the manager intends to obtain the views of staff to the service. To do this she will also forward them a questionnaire. Records showed that the welfare and safety of residents is safeguarded. The home has a valid certificates showing the safety of electrical and gas installations and the testing of electrical appliances. The home has a fire risk assessment, there is regular testing and servicing of fire safety equipment and staff receive regular training by an external fire safety trainer. The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 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 4 3 3 4 X 5 x INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 3 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 3 X X 3 x The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 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. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action 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 The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 29 Commission for Social Care Inspection Ashburton Office Unit D1 Linhay Business Park Ashburton TQ13 7UP 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 The Anchorage DS0000022116.V335123.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 30 - 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!