Inspection on 02/05/06 for The Bay

This inspection was carried out on 2nd May 2006.

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

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 3 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

The Bay 06/11/08

The Bay 15/05/07

The Bay 08/09/05

The Bay 03/05/05

The Bay 02/12/04

The Bay 22/06/04

Similar services:

Insight - Eastchurch

Southfields

Thorndene

Magenta

Seabourne House

33 St John`s Church Road

Dovedale Court

Lyncol House

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 The Bay 29 Dymchurch Road St Marys Bay Kent TN29 0HF Lead Inspector Wendy Mills Key Unannounced Inspection 2nd May 2006 12:00 The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The Bay Address 29 Dymchurch Road St Marys Bay Kent TN29 0HF 01797 367538 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) Parkcare Homes (No2) Ltd Vacant Care Home 16 Category(ies) of Learning disability (16) registration, with number of places The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. Service users is restricted to two (2) over the age of 65 years old whose DOB are 24/09/1916 and 05/09/1940. Three (3) can also be used for service users who have a physical disability. 8th September 2005 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: The Bay is a residential care home for up to sixteen people with learning disabilities. There are three places for people with a learning disability and associated physical disability. It is part of the Craegmoor group of companies and the registered provider is Parkcare Homes (NO. 2) Ltd. The Bay consists of three separate, adjacent houses with a communal garden at the rear. It is situated in a small close about a mile from the coastal town of New Romney. The sea, churches and local shops are within walking distance. Larger shopping areas, colleges and other amenities are available at Ashford, Hythe and Folkestone. The manager of the home is Mr Keith Yarnley. He previous managed another home in the Craegmoor Group. His application for registration is currently with the CSCI. The fees range from £391.47 to £871.25. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This visit was unannounced and took place on 2nd May 2006. During the visit discussions took place between the area manager, Mrs Sarah O’Mara and the manager, Mr Keith Yarnley. Six residents and five members of staff were spoken to during the course of the visit. Later four relatives were contacted by telephone to seek their views. Documentation was examined and a tour of the home undertaken. Currently there are thirteen residents in the home. There are three vacancies as some residents have moved on to homes that are more appropriate to their needs. Several of the residents were at college or taking part in other activities at the time of inspection. It was good to note that a number of improvements had taken place since the last inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? There has been a significant improvement in the way the home helps the residents participate in meaningful activities. There is now a much wider range of opportunities for then to participate in and the residents are consequently much happier. Staffing levels and staff training have significantly improved. Consequently morale in the home is much higher. Staff are much clearer about their roles and responsibilities and say that there is stronger leadership in the home now. The home is improving the way in which it monitors the healthcare of the residents. Healthcare appointments have been made and staff are more knowledgeable about medical conditions such as diabetes. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1,2 & 5 Quality is this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home provides good information for the residents, prospective residents and their supporters. EVIDENCE: There is a comprehensive statement of purpose and a service user guide. The service user guide is produced in an easily understood format that includes pictures and symbols. There are admissions policies and procedures that include the opportunity for trail periods and visits to the home. Pre-admission documentation includes a comprehensive assessment format. Previously there have been some poor judgements made about the suitability of the home for some residents. These problems have now been rectified and three of the residents have moved on the homes that can more appropriately meet their needs. No new residents have been admitted since the last inspection visit. All residents have written contracts that are approved by their care managers and the Social services Contracts department. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9 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 The quality in this outcome group is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. There has been an improvement in the way the home provides care for the residents. Some individual plans have not drawn sufficiently from needs assessments. Risk assessments are in place and residents are encouraged to maximise their independence There has been a good improvement in the way the home communicates with the residents and includes them in the running of the home. EVIDENCE: Care plans are up to date and in order. They have all been reviewed within the last six months and risk assessments are in place. However, some should be more detailed to include details of how staff should prompt individual residents to maintain their personal care. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 The home assesses risk and supports the residents to make decisions about the activities they take part in even if there is some risk. Inspection of care plans showed that risk assessments are in place. The residents said that they could talk to staff or the manager if they are worried. They said that they knew this information is only being shared if it is essential. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 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): 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 Quality in this outcome group is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home has made a great improvement in the way it supports the residents in all aspects of their personal development. Nutrition is now well managed and a healthy menu is provided. EVIDENCE: There is now a greater range of opportunities for the residents. All have busy activity schedules that reflect their individual interests. Residents said that they enjoy going out and were confident in talking about their individual interests and aspirations. All service users have work, college and/or activity placements. This means that they spend much of their time in creative and meaningful activities. Some of the residents have part-time employment and are very proud to talk about their jobs and responsibilities. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 The residents said that they were very happy living in the home. They said that the staff helped them with their lives and that they go out much more now. Care plans and activity records showed that there is now a wider range of activities and opportunities available. At the end of the inspection the residents were getting ready and looking forward to going to a club for the evening. The residents are well supported in maintaining contact with their family and friends. Telephones are available in each house and some of the residents have their own mobile telephones. Some have relatives living abroad and the home helps the residents send e-mails to these relatives each week. Contact is maintained with the community learning disability nurses and their advice is sought in respect of health education and sexual counselling when indicated. Inspection of menus, food storage and conversation with staff confirmed that there is an adequate budget for food and that the residents are encouraged to make healthy choices in respect of food. There was a plentiful supply of fresh produce, including fresh fruit, readily available in each house. Residents said that they enjoyed their meals and can help choose the food they eat. A delicious smelling pasta bolognaise was being prepared for the main meal on the day of inspection. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 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 group is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. There has been an improvement in the way the home supports the personal and healthcare of the residents. More attention to detail is still required in some aspects of personal care. Healthcare is now kept under regular review. Medication management in the home is satisfactory but the storage of medication in one house would benefit from review. EVIDENCE: Nearly all the residents spoken to were well dressed and clean. However, the clothes and face of one resident still had food stains on them some two hours after lunch. This compromised the dignity and self esteem of this resident. Inspection of care plans showed that some were not detailed enough. This means that there is not enough guidance for staff to help them prompt the residents appropriately when they need to give attention to their own personal care. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 There has been a significant improvement in the way the home supports the healthcare of the residents. Appropriate dental and medical appointments have been made and kept. Staff said that their access to training has greatly improved and their knowledge about specific conditions such as diabetes is now more extensive. Monthly records are kept of the residents’ weights. However, this chart could be improved by ensuring that significant weight changes are noted and a record made of any action taken. A note of the purpose of monitoring weight should also be included in this chart. Medicines are stored appropriately and temperatures of storage areas are monitored. The medicine cupboard in one house is situated in the utility area where mops and buckets are also stored. The home should consider an alternative place for either the mops or the medicine cupboard. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 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 group is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The home has improved the way in which it manages complaints and adult protection issues but these improvements must be maintained. EVIDENCE: Over the past year there have been serious concerns about many of the aspects of care at the home. Following these concerns, an action plan was put in place. A new manager was appointed, additional staff were recruited, staff training was increased and several environmental improvements were made. Already there is significant improvement but the home must work hard to sustain this and to continue to improve further. Residents and their relatives said that they had no complaints and are happy with the way the home is run. There have been no formal complaints since the last inspection. Conversation with staff confirmed that they know what to do should they ever suspect abuse. They have received training on the prevention of abuse. Last year there were a number of concerns in respect of adult protection. This resulted in a number of meetings with the adult protection team. A satisfactory action plan was produced by the home. As a result, staffing levels and staff training have improved. The company also carried out a thorough audit of the residents’ finances. This means that the residents are now better protected from all forms of abuse. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 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, 28 & 30 Quality in this outcome is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. The environment of the home has improved since the last inspection. More attention to detail is required when to checking the toilets and bathrooms. The home provides appropriate equipment for those residents who have mobility problems. EVIDENCE: The home is well decorated, comfortable and free from offensive odours. This gives a homely and welcoming atmosphere for the residents and their visitors. However, some toilet areas require more frequent checking throughout the day to ensure that they are hygienic at all times. Several rooms have been decorated since the last inspection. Some rooms have new furniture. New lampshades and curtains have been provided in some of the communal areas. A maintenance person is now employed in the home and this has improved the general level of attention to small jobs. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 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): 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 & 36 Quality in this outcome group is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. Staffing levels, staff training and staff understanding of their roles and responsibilities have improved greatly and are now good. EVIDENCE: This means that staff morale is good and their improved job satisfaction reflects positively on the lives of the residents. Staff said that they are now more confident about the way the home is managed. They said that their roles and responsibilities are now much clearer and that there is a good structure for reporting concerns. They said that they believe their views are taken into account. There are more explicit reporting mechanisms so they feel that their views are taken into consideration. They said that they were pleased that relationships amongst the staff have improved since the appointment of new staff and the appointment of Mr Yarnley, the new manager. Inspection of staff files showed that all appropriate checks have been made before staff are assigned to work in the home. Staff files contained good evidence of recent training. All staff have completed all the necessary statutory training. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 Inspection of staffing rosters showed a good level of staffing at all times. This, in turn has meant that the activities in which the residents participate can be more varied and tailored to individual needs and aspirations. One to one staff supervision is now established. There is a specific form on which this is recorded. Supervision records were available of inspection. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 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, 38, 39, 42 & 43 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to the service. There is now a clear sense of direction for the home. There is improved consultation with the residents and staff. Health and safety in the home has been improved by increased investment in the maintenance of the home. Recent additional investment by the Registered Providers has meant that improvements have been made in a number of outcome areas. EVIDENCE: Mr Yarnley has been managing the home for approximately eight months. The area manager, Mrs Sarah O’Mara has increased the frequency of her visits to the home and was in the home on the day of inspection. Therefore it was The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 possible to discuss the changes and improvements in the home with both the manager and the area manager. Both Mr Yarnley and Mrs O’Mara showed a good understanding of the needs of the residents and the root causes of the difficulties that arose in the home last summer. The registered providers have acted to address concerns about the home and have demonstrated a firm commitment by investing time and money in the home to make the improvements. Staff said that they respect Mr Yarnley and that they appreciate the clear leadership he demonstrates. They said he listens to their views and makes changes when necessary. The residents said that they could talk to the staff or the manager if they are worried about anything. They can also put forward their views at house meetings. Health and safety at the home has improved a great deal. Maintenance is better managed and no health and safety hazards were noted during a tour of the home. The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 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 X 4 X 5 3 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 3 29 3 30 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 3 32 3 33 3 34 3 35 3 36 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 2 3 2 X 3 3 3 X X 3 3 The Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO 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 YA6 Regulation 15 Requirement Care plans to contain more detailed information about how care is to be given. Staff to receive training so that they can appropriately prompt residents in maintaining their personal care. More regular checks to be made on toilets to ensure they are clean and hygienic at all times. Timescale for action 30/06/06 2 YA18 12, 13 30/06/06 3 YA30 23 02/05/06 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Kent and Medway Area Office 11th Floor International House Dover Place Ashford Kent TN23 1HU 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 Bay DS0000023319.V292872.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!