Inspection on 15/11/06 for The Autistic Society

This inspection was carried out on 15th November 2006.

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 Autistic Society 09/03/06

The Autistic Society 02/08/05

The Autistic Society 23/11/04

The Autistic Society 01/06/04

The Autistic Society 12/02/04

Similar services:

Clover House

Parkside

Park Lodge

Mere Hall View

St Bonaventures

Hudson Road

Whitewalls

Home Farm

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 The Autistic Society 1 Mainwaring Terrace Northern Moor Manchester M23 0EW Lead Inspector Sarah Oldham Key Unannounced Inspection 15th November 2006 11:00 The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.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 Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.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 Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The Autistic Society Address 1 Mainwaring Terrace Northern Moor Manchester M23 0EW 0161 945 0040 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) Vanessahalfacre@nas.org.uk National Autistic Society Ms Helen Slack Care Home 14 Category(ies) of Learning disability (14) registration, with number of places The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. All service users accommodated have a diagnosis of Autism/Asperger`s syndrome. 9th March 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Mainwaring Terrace is a care home providing 24-hour care and accommodation operated by the National Autistic Society for 12 adults diagnosed within the autistic spectrum of disorders. The service comprises of three modern semidetached houses located on a quiet residential housing estate. Each house has four single bedrooms, communal lounge, bathroom, kitchen and a dining area. There is a shared rear private garden that has a porta-cabin for service users to receive visitors in private and spend quiet time. The home is in keeping with other homes in the area. Local community facilities include shops, pubs, a post office and public transport. Fees for the service range between £1,200 and £1,800 per week. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspector went to the home without telling anyone she was going to visit on the 15 November 2006. The total time spent at the home was 5 hours. This included meeting a number of residents. The inspector also: • Spoke with the manager. • Looked at some files. • Completed a tour of the premises. • Watched how the staff cared for the residents. • Spoke with relatives of residents living at the home. To help the inspector to write the report the home was asked to provide a selfassessment report /questionnaire which was completed by the manager and received by the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The inspector also took into account other information, which the Commission knew about the home. There were some important things the inspector wanted to find out about the care given by the home. These were: • • • • How How How How the the the the health needs of residents were met. residents’ personal care needs were met. staff helped to kept residents safe. home respected residents’ rights, diversity and identity. If you want to get a full picture of what it is like to stay at Mainwairing Terrace you might like to read the last report as well. You can find the address or website details on page 2 and this tells you where you can obtain the report. What the service does well: There were some good things that the inspector found out about the home, these included: Relatives felt that the manager and staff kept them well informed about the care needs of their relative and if there was any change to them. The staffs’ approach to residents gave the families the impression that the residents’ were cared for. The manager and staff listened and kept families informed. Information about the home was available for all people who were thinking about living at the home. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 People were able to visit the home to see for themselves the services that were available. People could visit the home on a number of occasions to get a better overall view of the home before they made a decision about moving into the home. The home had developed quality assurance forms. These were used to record the views of the residents’ and to change things if it made the home better for the resident to live in. The residents’ at the home were supported by staff to use the local community facilities and to become involved in providing services for the people living within that community. Some of the residents’ at the home had provided musical entertainment at a local care home and day centre for older people. The home provided a safe place for people who needed high levels of support due to their complex needs. All residents had care plans in place that included the aims, objectives and individual goals clearly recorded. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and residents were supported to chair their own reviews if they wished to do so. The home helped people to make informed choices and decisions about what they wanted for their future. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The home had developed pictorial surveys and information files for the residents to complete. However, these had not been completed on a regular basis. This needed to continue and the importance of this to be promoted. Residents would benefit from further support in completing these documents. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1,2, 3 & 4 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Existing and prospective residents were provided with updated information about the home. A full assessment of care needs was undertaken prior to arranging the admission of a resident into the home. EVIDENCE: The manager said that prospective residents were provided with information about the home prior to making a decision about moving to the home. They were also invited to visit the home to spend time with the residents’ and staff and to see the facilities that were available at the home and in the surrounding area. Under the care management process all prospective residents had their needs assessed by a care manager. This assessment would then be forwarded to the manager at the home who in addition to this would then also complete an assessment to make sure that the home and the staff at the home had the appropriate facilities and skills in order to meet the person’s individual needs. Copies of these assessments were maintained on confidential files for each resident. Evidence was available to indicate that visit’s to the home were arranged for prospective residents. The intention of the visit was to enable them to have a The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 better understanding of the facilities available and to enable them to meet the other residents’ and staff. Relatives spoken to said that they had been able to visit the home prior to any decision being made about their relative moving in. They said that information was made available about the home and that they were able to discuss any issues or concerns that they had with the manager or members of the staff team. The manager said that consideration was also given to the needs of the current residents’ at the home and the impact that any new resident could have in relation to them. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7, & 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. All residents at the home had a care plan that clearly identified their needs and goals and how these would be met. The home had the systems and practice in place to allow people to make decisions in their lives and to take meaningful risks. EVIDENCE: Each resident at the home had a care plan that detailed their individual needs and their personal goals and how the person would be supported to achieve those goals. Three care plans were examined and were found to contain comprehensive information and details about the support the resident required to achieve their goals. Information regarding health care, physical and social care needs were clearly recorded and there was ongoing evidence throughout the individual resident’s files that these care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to incorporate any changes to their needs. To support the resident to express their views the home had developed individual pictorial files for the residents. Three of these files were examined to The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 ensure that there was ongoing consultation with the resident and that their views expressed were reflected in the care plan. This was evidenced in all three files viewed. The home had a clear and comprehensive risk assessment process that identified situations, hazards and people’s behaviours that could cause them, or others, harm. This process began at the pre-admission stage when a persons needs were fully assessed and continued through on-going assessment and review of the way people are supported to cope with stressful or new situations. Due to the needs of people within the autistic spectrum of disorders, the home did have to place certain restrictions of choice and control in some areas of their lives. This was only carried out to provide a person with clear boundaries and to create a safe environment in which people could still participate in valued activities. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ were provided with the opportunities to take part in activities that they wished to do making use of local community based facilities as well as within their own home. EVIDENCE: Residents’ at the home were supported to take part in activities within the local community. At the time of the site visit one of the resident’s was being supported to work within a voluntary charity shop. Other residents’ had formed a small singing and musical group and had provided entertainment for older people in the community at a community centre and care home. One of the resident’s spoken to by the inspector said that they “really enjoyed it”. The manager said that it had been very beneficial for the resident’s involved and had supported them to make a positive contribution within the local community. Residents’ were supported to attend leisure activities including visits to the cinema and a leisure centre. Trips were arranged in consultation with the The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 resident and were either on an individual or group basis. There was clear evidence that activities were planned and were appropriate for the individual resident. Family and friends were able to visit the home and were involved in their relatives/friends care and support. Visitors spoken to felt that the home provided a good service and that their relative/friend was appropriately supported in all activities of daily living. Staff were observed to provide support in consultation with the resident, whilst maintaining dignity and treating them with respect. Residents’ who were able to communicate with the inspector said that they were “happy” and “the staff were nice”. The home provided a nutritionally balanced diet that offered choice. People’s nutritional needs would be identified through the assessment process and their personal likes and dislikes would influence the menu and meal choices made available to them. Residents were involved in the planning of menus and the shopping for the home. Mealtime routines were based on the individual person’s needs and meals could be taken either communally or in private. The home had sufficient stocks of food including fresh and frozen foods and these were found to be stored appropriately. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home had systems and practices in place to ensure peoples’ physical and emotional health care needs were met safely. EVIDENCE: The residents’ care plans detailed their personal support needs. Staff spoken to were clear about how individual needs were to be met and the importance of ensuring that those needs were supported in a dignified and sensitive manner. Residents were encouraged and supported to be ‘individual’ and chose their own clothing with support and advice if required. On the day of the visit the inspector observed how staff discussed with the resident the appropriate outdoor clothing for the weather on that day. The resident was supported to make an informed decision about what to wear. The health care needs of residents’ were recorded on the care plan and any appointments regarding the medical support they may need e.g. visits to the doctor, was also recorded including the outcome of that appointment. Where necessary, the care plan was amended to indicate any change in the health care needs of the individual resident. Residents had an annual health care The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 assessment undertaken to ensure that all their medical needs were identified and were being met. The home had addressed the requirement made at the previous inspection with regards medication that was prescribed on a ‘PRN’ basis (to be given ‘as and when required’) and records regarding this were maintained for the individual resident. Medication Administration Record sheets were examined and found to be appropriately signed. Medication received and returned to the pharmacy by the home was recorded. There was evidence on individual care plans of the medication prescribed to the individual resident and any changes in medication or in medical condition were also recorded. Staff spoken to were able to clearly demonstrate that they had an understanding of the individual health care needs of the residents and if there was a change in the residents’ condition they would contact the doctor for advice. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Polices and procedures were in place to enable concerns to be raised and to protect residents from neglect and abuse. Staff received training in adult protection procedures. EVIDENCE: The home had a clear complaints policy and procedure in place. Details of how to make a complaint were provided in the Statement of Purpose and the Service Users’ Guide. The pictorial information file for each resident also ensured that they had the appropriate information in an accessible format. Over the past twelve months the home had received three complaints. A record of these had been completed and these had been addressed and responded to in accordance with the policy. One of these complaints had been received by the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and had been investigated by the home in detail and a response provided to CSCI and to the complainant. Robust procedures were also in place to ensure that residents’ were protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. Risk assessments had been completed and records on individual care files were maintained to ensure that the residents’ were supported in accordance with their care plan. Staff had received training with regards to the Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA). Staff spoken to by the inspector at the time of the visit was able to demonstrate an understanding about the different kinds of abuse and how to respond when an allegation had been made. POVA training was updated on a yearly basis and was mandatory for all staff to attend. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 25, 26, 27 & 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People lived in a homely and safe environment. Systems and training was in place to ensure peoples’ health and safety was maintained. EVIDENCE: The home consists of three houses and provided a good standard of accommodation for the residents. They had been individually furnished in accordance with the needs and wishes of the residents. The houses are in keeping with other houses within the area. There are local amenities available within walking distance and there is a regular bus service into central Manchester and surrounding areas. A maintenance programme was in place and the home employed a maintenance person to undertake minor repairs. The housing association that owns the properties were responsible for the general upkeep of the premises although the manager said that on occasions, they have had to wait for repairs to be carried out. Residents’ were encouraged and supported to personalise their own bedrooms. Family members who wished to become involved with this were able to do so. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Two residents showed the inspector their bedrooms and they were found to be spacious, warm and comfortable with suitable furnishings in place. One bedroom viewed did not contain all furnishings as identified in Standard 26 of the National Minimum Standards for younger adults. However, a risk assessment had been completed and an agreement made that had been recorded in the residents’ care plan why not all of the furnishings were in place. The staff and manager were continuing to find appropriate furnishings that would not present as a risk and that met the needs of the resident. The home had appropriate toilets and bathrooms available for the number of residents accommodated. The manager said that one of the bathrooms was being adapted to provide a ‘wet room’ to enable the staff to support residents’ with their personal care needs in accordance with the care plan and risk assessment. Each of the houses had their own laundry facilities and staff had access to protective equipment and alcohol wash for when providing intimate personal care and handling soiled items. At the previous inspection it had been identified that although staff had general training relating to health and safety as part of their induction programme, they did not have access to specific infection control training. This had been addressed and an infection control training programme had been made available for all staff to access as part of their ongoing training and development. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34, 35 & 36. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provided a vocational training programme for all staff. The home had recruitment policies; procedures and systems in place to protect vulnerable people. EVIDENCE: The home had a programme of vocational training in place. Staff were required to undertake National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) level 3 in care. This is above the National Minimum Standards of NVQ level 2. At the time of the visit to the home there were 39 staff employed, 12 had attained the NVQ level 3 and a further 10 were undertaking the course. In addition to the NVQ training the home ensured that staff had regular training including induction training, Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA), First Aid, Food Hygiene, Moving and Handling, risk assessment and risk management. Other training courses were also available. The home is part of the National Autistic Society (NAS) and followed the recruitment policy and procedures set down by the main organisation. All preemployment checks were made and staff did not start working at the home The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 until a current Criminal Records Bureau disclosure certificate had been obtained. All staff were supported to undertake their role and had planned formal supervision on a regular basis and also received an annual appraisal. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39 & 42 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The management team had the skills and knowledge to run the home with systems in place to maintain people’s welfare. EVIDENCE: The registered manager had achieved the Certificate in Management Studies and had completed the NVQ Level 4 in Care. She had attended regular update training to maintain her skills, knowledge and competence. A deputy manager who had worked at the home for a number of years had also completed NVQ Level 4 supported by the manager. Each of the three houses also had a team manager with their own specific roles and responsibilities in providing support to the staff team. The manager was able to demonstrate a clear understanding of her role and responsibilities as a registered manager. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 The home had a quality assurance monitoring system in place to gain the views of the residents’, their families and representatives. The quality assurance forms were in an accessible format for the residents’ and the manager was able to demonstrate that action was undertaken in response to the completed quality assurance forms. The Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) had sent surveys to the residents and those that had been returned indicated that the residents’ views were sought and action taken to address any issues or concerns. The home had in place ‘fire monitoring’ checks and regular servicing of fire, gas and electrical equipment. Discussion with the manager and deputy manager identified that risk assessments were carried out for safe working practices and regularly reviewed to promote the health and safety of the residents’ living at the home. The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 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 3 26 3 27 3 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 Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 NO Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 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 Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ 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 The Autistic Society DS0000021603.V313092.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!