Inspection on 13/09/05 for The Dorothy Lucy Centre

This inspection was carried out on 13th September 2005.

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

Other inspections for this house

The Dorothy Lucy Centre 22/12/06

The Dorothy Lucy Centre 22/02/06

The Dorothy Lucy Centre 11/01/05

The Dorothy Lucy Centre 27/09/04

Similar services:

The Shelley

Springfield House

Sutton Lodge Nursing Home

St Helier`s Residential Hotel

St Joseph`s

Ridgemount

Wingham Court

Old Hastings House

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE The Dorothy Lucy Centre Northumberland Road Maidstone Kent ME15 7TA Lead Inspector Gary Bartlett Announced 13 September 09:45 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The Dorothy Lucy Centre Address Northumberland Road Maidstone Kent ME15 7TA 01622 678071 01622 762877 Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) Kent County Council Mrs Julie Carol Parsooramen Care Home 28 Category(ies) of Dementia (10) registration, with number Old age (18) of places The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. Ten beds may be used for Service users between 55 years of age and 65 years of age Date of last inspection 11 January 2005 Brief Description of the Service: The Dorothy Lucy Centre is a detached, purpose built property with accommodation on the ground floor only. It is owned and operated by Kent County Council. An integral part of the building comprises a day care facility run by Kent County Council for 3 days per week. The Home itself comprises three units; “Allington” is a respite unit for older people.“Mereworth” is a respite unit for older people with mental health needs.“Leeds” is a recuperative care unit offering a service that gives older people a chance to receive rehabilitation with the aim of returning to living in their own home.The Home currently offers occupancy to 28 Service Users. All bedrooms are used for single occupancy and each is equipped with a staff call point.The Dorothy Lucy Centre is located on the outskirts of Maidstone where there are the usual facilities of a town. There is access to public transport close by. Space for car parking is available and there is a garden for Service Users to use. The Home’s staffing team comprises the Manager, Team Leaders and care staff that work a roster that gives 24-hour cover. The Home also employs other staff for catering, domestic and maintenance tasks. A qualified Occupational Therapist, employed by the O.T. Bureau works at the Home weekdays with an Occupational Therapy Assistant. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This announced inspection was conducted by Gary Bartlett, Regulatory Inspector, who was in the Dorothy Lucy Centre from 9.45 a.m. until 5.00 pm. During that time the Inspector spoke with some residents, visitors a District Nurse and staff. Parts of the Home and some records were inspected. Some comment cards were received prior to the inspection. Service users and their relatives responded that they liked the home, felt well and staff gave good care. Responses from health professionals also indicated good standards of care, good communication and helpful staff. Statements on comment cards included: • “I know she is well cared for” • “My mother attends for respite care and is as happy as anyone” • “…ensure respite is a pleasurable experience.” The Manager and staff gave their full co-operation throughout the inspection. What the service does well: The Dorothy Lucy Centre Staff provided a welcoming and comfortable environment, was clean, bright and airy. The Home had an open and friendly atmosphere with good interaction between service users, staff and visitors. Staff were very successful in maintaining a calm atmosphere even at busy times. Personal health care needs were generally well supported and service users’ individual preferences were catered for where practicable. There was a good standard of hygiene and cleanliness in the home. Staff were well supported in their NVQ training. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 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 Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 The Home’s Statement of Purpose and Residents Guide provided service users and prospective service users the information they need to make a decision about moving into the Home. Some poor or out of date pre-admission assessment information supplied to the Home did not ensure all service users needs could be met. Respite care service users benefited from being able to visit the home prior to admission. EVIDENCE: The Manager said the Statement of Purpose was accurately descriptive of the aims, objectives, philosophy of care, services and facilities and terms and conditions of the Dorothy Lucy Centre and copies of the Service Users Guide were provided for each service users or their representative. These were not inspected on this occasion. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 The Manager described how they were intending to amend the statement of terms and conditions to be more appropriate for respite care and had received confirmation this could be changed. The Home’s staff assessed prospective service users of respite care during a days visit prior to their admission. Service user said staff had been very helpful and kind in assisting them to settle in. The Manager and the Occupational Therapist reviewed assessments, notes and care plans provided by Care Managers, before accepting a referral to the Leeds unit. Some information the Home had received was out of date, lacked the detail necessary for the specialist assessment of care needs to be made or was inaccurate. Consequently, appropriate equipment/professional input had not always been arranged to be in place at the time of admission. As a result the Home could not always meet the occupational therapy needs of service users requiring rehabilitation. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7, 8 and 10 Service users’ health and welfare would be better promoted by care plans being more consistently maintained and risk assessment being recorded when necessary. Service users’ health needs were met with good liaison with relevant health care professionals. Personal care was offered to service users in a way that protected their privacy and dignity and promoted independence as far as was practicable. EVIDENCE: Each service user had a care plan. Four care plans were inspected in detail. Most records seen were up to date, and contained information to support staff to meet the needs of the service users. Although there was an improvement in the plans, one was not reflective of the service users current condition. Risk assessments had not been recorded as a result of recent incidents, potentially putting service users and staff at risk. Care staff had become more involved in writing records of daily care and the standard of these records was noticeably improved. Most of the daily records seen were informative and included necessary detail. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 The Home continued to have a good working relationship with the local health professionals, supporting service users in their health care needs. Due to the short-term care this tended to be limited to District Nurses, Occupational Therapist and GP for direct care needs during their stay. It is current Kent County Council policy that staff do not generally provide invasive care so staff do not do blood sugar monitoring (BSM) tests for the diabetic service users. This is done by visiting health care professionals. Consequently service users were dependant on a District Nurse of G.P. to come to the Home to do a BSM test if they were unwell or displaying adverse symptoms. There was a resultant delay in establishing whether the diabetes was the cause. There was some discussion about the practicalities and advantages of certain staff being trained to do these tests by an appropriate health care professional. From observation and discussion with service users, a health care professional and a visitor, it was clear that staff treated service users with respect and promoted their privacy and dignity. The Manager described how it was their intention to ensure all bedrooms that could be looked into from the garden were provided with net curtains to preserve the occuopants’ privacy. Service users could meet with visitors and make telephone calls in private. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12, 13, 14 and 15 Service users had some choices about their daily lives, were able to have visitors at any reasonable time and enjoyed continued links with the local community where this was their preference. Dietary needs of service users were well catered for with a balanced and varied selection of food. Commendable efforts were made to meet service users’ individual tastes. EVIDENCE: Service users spoken with were happy with the daily routines and flexibility offered. Staff said many service users required encouragement to take part in activities offered. Some continued to attend Heathside Day centre during their stays to maintain their daily routine as if at home. Care records demonstrated that one-to-one and group activities took place and these included board games, gentle group exercises, skittles and bingo. Professional entertainers occasionally visit the home. On the day of the inspection service users were observed watching the TV, talking amongst each other, reading newspapers and books. Some service users attended a local church with the assistance of other church members or friends and relatives. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 Several service users spoke of how they enjoyed using the visiting hairdressing service. The Home operated a flexible visiting arrangement with visitors popping in and out as they wished, but with the recommendation to avoid busy periods such as early morning and mealtimes especially if they wanted to talk with staff. Service users moved freely around the home and grounds during this visit. To promote security, the front door was locked and all visitors were required to sign in/out of the Home. The Manager stated that service users continued to be encouraged to handle their own financial affairs if they wanted to and had the capacity. Where this was not possible, relatives or Social Services supported them with this. Service users were able to bring personal possessions to the Home with them, although in most cases this was of a limited nature due to the short-term care given. The Manager confirmed that items brought in by service users had to comply with current health and safety requirements. A staff member stated service users had access to their personal records. A service user said they were aware that they could read their records if they so wished but had not wanted to. The Cook described how she, or another member of the kitchen staff, visited each unit every day to speak with service users. Service users often went to stand at the kitchen-hatch to chat and watch while food was being prepared. Consequently, the kitchen staff had a good knowledge of service users’ individual preferences and records of foods served showed that these were met as best possible. Good food hygiene records and monitoring were seen to be undertaken by staff. Service Users continued to be complementary of the food served. Meal times are set for practical reasons but this was flexible to accommodate activities. The meals seen to be served were generous in portions and looked appetising. Fresh fruit and hot and cold drinks were observed to be accessible through out the day, as well as snacks and biscuits The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16, 17 and 18 The Home had a satisfactory complaints system and service users and their relatives knew their complaints would be listened to and acted on. Service users legal rights were protected and there were systems to ensure residents were protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: Service users benefited from the complaints procedure being readily available. A visitor described how they knew of the complaints procedure but had not had cause to use it. When they had concerns they went to staff who “always sorted out any problems”. The Manager said that records of complaints were kept and these included details of investigation and action taken and were used to inform future practice. The Manager described how the permanent service users at the Dorothy Lucy Centre were enabled to be on the electoral role. The Manager confirmed that where residents lacked capacity they were facilitated access to advocacy services. There were procedures for responding to suspicion or evidence of abuse or neglect to ensure the safety and protection of service users. The Manager and other staff spoken with demonstrated a sound understanding of adult protection procedures and stated that any allegation of abuse would be investigated promptly and a record kept of all actions taken. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 26 The Home provided a safe and clean environment that would have benefited from some refurnishing and refurbishment. EVIDENCE: The Home was purpose built and allowed ease of access to all parts for service users with mobility difficulties. Service users said they were comfortable and liked their bedrooms and the communal areas. Those parts of the Home inspected were clean and commendably free from unpleasant odours. It was seen that repair work was carried out where required. There was still not a pro-active redecoration and refurbishment programme and parts of the Home were decorated as funds permitted. Many areas were looking tired and worn. The carpeting in many areas was in need of replacing due to heavy staining. The bedrooms seen were generally of an appropriate size to facilitate the meeting of service users’ needs, although not every bedroom was suitable if a service user required the use of a hoist or wheelchair. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 Adequate recreational and dining space was provided and service users could choose where to spend their time from a variety of locations. Lighting in the Home was bright and domestic in character and furnishings in the communal areas were of generally good quality although some chairs were showing their age and were in need of replacement. Service users and staff considered the bathing and toilet facilities to be adequate. The staff call system was fitted to all parts of the Home used by the service users. Some service users spoke of having enjoyed using the garden in the recent warm weather and were appreciative of the work that had been done to improve the garden and renovate the fishpond. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27, 28 and 29 Recruitment processes are robust and offer protection to people living at the Home. EVIDENCE: Service users, visitors and health care professionals spoke highly of the staff: Statements on comment cards included: • • “Staff liaise with me regarding any issues and are very helpful when I phone or visit and quickly take on board any issues and deal with them.” “The staff are always so helpful and I am sure if I asked for anything it would be given.” Staff were seen to be attentive and demonstrated a commitment to meeting service users needs. The staff rotas inspected indicated staffing levels were geared to peak times of activity and services users said staff were always readily available. The Manager stated they had reviewed staffing levels and was satisfied they were adequate to meet service users’ needs. Records seen indicated that robust recruitment procedures were used and ensured service users received care only from staff that had been properly vetted. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 The Manager described how the NVQ training had been disrupted by the demise of a training organisation but alternative trainers had been identified and NVQ training was recommencing. Staff spoke of the support they were given to achieve their NVQ qualifications. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 31, 32, 33, 36, 37 and 38 The Home benefited from an experienced Manager who was accessible and had high expectations of the service to be delivered. The Home regularly reviewed aspects of its performance through a programme of self-review and consultations, which included the opinions of service users and relatives. To ensure quality of care staff must be supervised. EVIDENCE: The Manager had over 20 years experience in care, a Diploma in Management and was a NVQ Assessor D32/33 and has managed the Dorothy Lucy Centre since 1997. Service users and staff considered the Manager to be approachable, understanding and supportive. One service user said “she The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 always has time for all of us”. Relaxed banter between the Manager and staff was observed and it was always clear where the authority lay. Throughout the inspection, the Manager demonstrated a commendable honesty and commitment to a high quality service. The Home was regularly audited by Kent County Council. The records of these audits were also used as Regulation 26 reports to the Commission. The Manager described how service users and their representatives or relatives were consulted for their views of the service. Staff were seen to be diligent in minimising risks to residents by carefully placing equipment to avoid obstruction and in ensuring COSHH requirements were adhered to. Staff had not had regular supervision which, the Manager said, was due to long term sickness of some senior staff. The Manager understood the lack of supervision compromised the Home’s ability to monitor staff performance and provide guidance where necessary to ensure a good service was offered to service users. Assurances were given that staff supervision was being rescheduled. Records of maintenance and safety checks were not inspected on this occasion. The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 3 2 2 2 3 3 HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 3 9 x 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 4 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 2 3 3 3 3 x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 2 29 3 30 x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 3 3 3 3 3 x x 2 2 3 The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 Yes Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard OP3.1 Regulation 14(1)(a) Requirement The registered person shall not provide accommodation to a service user at the care home unless, so far as it is practicable to do so the needs of the service user have been assessed by a suitably qualified or suitable trained person in that where it is policy for pre admission assessments to be undertaken by other healtth care professionals, Kent County Council must ensure the Home is provided with up to date information with sufficient detail to identify whether needs can be met in the Home and to inform the care package and risk assessments. This was a requirement in previous inspection reports. “The registered person shall maintain records as specified in Schedules 3 and 4. The registered person shall keep the service user’s plan under review” in that care plans must be accurately reflective of service users current needs. The registered person shall Timescale for action Action plan to be received by CSCI by 30/10/05 2. 7 15(2) 17 Schedules 3 and 4 Action plan to be received by CSCI by 30/10/05 3. 7 13(4) Action plan Version 1.30 Page 24 The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc 4. 36 18(2) ensure that unnecessary risks to the health and safety of service users are identified and so far as possible eliminated in that risk assessments must be recorded in response to incidents and deteriorating changes in situation. “The registered person shall ensure that persons working at the care home are appropriately supervised”. to be received by CSCI by 30/10/05 Action plan to be received by CSCI by 30/10/05 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. Refer to Standard 2 Good Practice Recommendations It is recommended that the service users’ statement of terms and conditions have a stated period of notice appropriate to the service being delivered. This continued to be an outstanding recommendation It is recommended the Manager completes the stated intention of ensuring all bedrooms are provided with net curtains where they can be looked into from the garden. It is recommended that a pro-active programme of redecoration and refurbishment be implemented. This continued to be an outstanding recommendation It is recommended that the stained carpets and worn chairs should replaced. This continued to be an outstanding recommendation. It is recommended that a minimum ratio of 50 trained members of staff (NVQ2 or equivalent) be achieved 2. 3. 4. 5. 10 19 19 28 The Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection The Oast, Hermitage Court Hermitage Lane Maidstone Kent ME16 9NT 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 Dorothy Lucy Centre H56-H06 S37761 Dorothy Lucy Centre V239450 130905 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!