Inspection on 16/01/07 for The Legard

This inspection was carried out on 16th January 2007.

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

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 10 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

The Legard 10/02/09

The Legard 09/01/08

The Legard 16/03/06

Similar services:

Larch Avenue

Alderson Road 12

Cranworth Close Registered Care Home

Muston Road (70)

Grayling

The Cornerstone

John Street Nursing Home

Pennine Camphill

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 The Legard Wivern Road Holderness Road Kingston upon Hull East Yorkshire HU9 4HU Lead Inspector Simon Morley Unannounced Inspection 16th January 2007 09:30 The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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 Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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 Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The Legard Address Wivern Road Holderness Road Kingston upon Hull East Yorkshire HU9 4HU 01482 781039 01482 781008 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) www.milburycare.com Milbury Care Services Kerry Ann Shepherd Care Home 10 Category(ies) of Learning disability (10), Physical disability (10) registration, with number of places The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 16th March 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Milbury Care own and manage The Legard. The home is registered to provide care and accommodation for up to 10 adults between the ages of 18-65 who have a learning disability and may also have physical disabilities. The home is located to the east of Hull city centre and is purpose built. The main home has eight single bedrooms, four upstairs and four downstairs. Bedrooms are paired together, each pair separated by a fully equipped disabled bathroom, each bedroom having individual access from either side. The upstairs bedrooms are set in two apartment-style living arrangements, each with a lounge and kitchen to promote independence living. There is an office, large hallway, kitchen/dining room, laundry, sensory room and shower room downstairs. Upstairs is an activity room and staff sleep-in room. There is wheelchair access throughout and a platform lift providing access to the upstairs accommodation. There is a smaller residential unit built later in the rear garden. This has further accommodation for two in separate flats. Each has an en suite bedroom and lounge/kitchen. These are for more independent residents and can be used by people with physical disabilities. The home has a large garden to the side and rear. There is a car park area to the side with additional street parking. At the time of inspection there were 7 residents living at the home. Fees are between £1500 and £1800 per week depending on a person’s care needs. Information about the home is available in the home and the company’s offices. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The inspector arrived at the home at 9.30 in the morning and left at 5.00 in the evening. He had a look around the home, and chatted with two of the residents staying at the home. He also talked to four staff and looked at what staff write down about the residents they look after. The inspector also looked at other records in relation to the management and maintenance of a care home. As it was difficult to communicate with all the residents, some time was spent observing how staff look after and communicate with them. Questionnaires about the home were sent out to two residents, their relatives and other health and social care professionals involved in their care. Five staff working at the home were also sent a questionnaire. Questionnaires were returned from two residents and one social care professional. What was said in the questionnaires and what people said during the inspection has been included in this report and used with other information to say how well the home is doing. What the service does well: This is a purpose built well designed home that is well maintained, safe comfortable and homely for the residents who live there. Staff are friendly, enthusiastic and keen to look after the residents well. They get some training to help them be good at their jobs and are thoroughly checked out to make sure they are suitable for this work and won’t harm anyone. There is a good admissions process, potential new residents can visit the home several times to become familiar with it and decide if they want to live there. What they need is written down and all residents have an individual support plan saying what help they need. Residents get help to make some choices about their lives and have some opportunities for socialising and going out. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: This is what must be done to meet the minimum standards: • Each resident must should have an individual written plan that clearly describes all the person’s health, personal and social needs and what support they require from staff. This is to help ensure residents get all the care they need. Restrictions on a resident’s freedom must be agreed with them, their relative or representative and other involved health and social care professionals. This is to ensure a person’s welfare is not harmed. There must be better planning and arranging of opportunities for residents to choose from a wider range of social, leisure and community activities to help improve the quality of their lives. Care plans must detail any resident’s particular dietary needs and staff must make sure residents get the necessary help. When it is part of some one’s care, staff must use accurate ways of determining a person’s fluid intake and record this accurately. Accurate records help monitor what people need well. Staff must stop telling residents they can do things only if they are good as this takes away their dignity. All a person’s health care needs must be clearly recorded in their individual plans to help make sure they get the support to keep healthy. • • • • • • The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 • All staff must have receive the following training: adult protection, infection control, moving and handling, fire safety, health and safety, basic food hygiene, first aid and managing challenging behaviour to help maintain the health, safety and welfare of the residents. These are ‘good practice suggestions’ to make things better based on what it says in the minimum standards: • • Information about the home should be accurate and not say person centred planning is used when it isn’t. This is to help people choose if they want to live there. The way in which assessment information is recorded and stored on file should improve making it clear exactly what a person’s care needs are. This will help ensure they get the care they need. The process of ‘person centred planning’ should be used to develop individual care plans. This will help improve the quality of care residents receive. There should be an annual quality assurance improvement plan describing how the service will develop in the interests of residents. Monthly checks by senior managers should improve to make sure residents get consistent quality care. • • • Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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 Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The admissions process is good but has some areas to improve on to help people make the right choice in living at The Legard. EVIDENCE: There was a good range of information for prospective service users and their relatives to help them decide if this is the home for them to come and live in. Use was made of pictures to help communicate what life in the home is like. Other formats are available as well on request. This information says the home uses ‘person centre planning’ – a way that describes a person’s wants, needs, ambitions and dreams from their point of view. And it includes what the support the person wants from staff to help them achieve this, in a written plan. The current care plans are a long way from doing this and need improving. This misleading information was an issue at the last inspection. People have their care needs assessed before moving into the home. Two sets of care records looked at had evidence of assessments. These are used to write individual plans of care for each person. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Assessment documentation was untidy and scrappy and hard to follow. It is recommended that this should improve to help make sure people get all the care they need. There is support and advice from community health services about individual residents’ conditions to help staff provide good care. There is also a company training policy to help make sure staff are trained and have the right skills to look after the residents. New residents have the opportunity to visit the home over a period of time to help them become familiar with it and decide whether to live there permanently. As well as a guide to the home new residents also get a contract with Milbury Care, describing any terms and conditions of their stay, what the fees are and what is provided for that and what is considered to be an ‘extra.’ For those residents who find the contract hard to read/understood then this is usually signed on their behalf by a relative. This is an improvement since the last inspection when there were no such contracts in place. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7 and 9. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The quality of care planning needs to improve to help make sure residents get good quality care. EVIDENCE: Peoples care needs were set out in an individual plan of care. These detailed what staff needed to do to help each resident. In parts these were good and detailed in other areas there was very little information e.g. opportunities for personal development, age appropriate activities, use of the local community and leisure services were all poorly planned for. Whereas things like personal care, bathing, medication and health care needs were better planned for. Some things that were written down as part of some one’s assessment were not included in their care plans. Care plans also did not cover all areas of care required by the national minimum standard. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 One resident appeared quite distressed when there were high noise levels e.g. the Hoover, or too many people around. But her care plan did not cover this issue: how best to avoid or deal with these situations. The quality of care plans must improve to help improve the quality of care residents get. It is recommended that implementing ‘person centred planning’ would also help improve the care planning process. Residents were able to make their own decisions for example about their appearance, clothing, when they got up, went to bed, what they ate and how they spent their time in the home. Some of these choices were recorded in daily notes. Staff were seen to support residents throughout the day to do what they wanted. There was a behaviour plan for one resident restricting them to the upstairs of the home if they have behaved in certain ways. This had not been properly agreed and is a restriction on that person’s rights. It could easily be seen as a form of punishment and abuse. Any restriction on some one’s rights must be properly agreed in line with the law to avoid their welfare being harmed. A range of potential risks to residents was considered as part of the care planning process. These are recorded as risk assessments and include the measures needed to reduce any danger whilst still allowing residents to take risks to promote their independence. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Better care planning would help improve the quality of lifestyle for residents. EVIDENCE: Residents views about activities, becoming part of, participating in the local community, and having access to and choice of a range of appropriate leisure facilities were not were not very detailed. One resident did go to college regularly and residents did say they could do what they want and make decisions. Daily records and observation did show that residents spend a lot of time indoors with staff. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Staff said that some of the local community facilities the residents used were no longer available. Residents’ choices are also limited to the number of staff on duty. Staff complete an ‘Activity Plan’ but this is done retrospectively. There must be better planning of opportunities for residents to improve their quality of life. Visitors are welcome to the home and residents also get help to visit their relatives. Staff spend time talking to residents and encouraging them to be involved in the home. One resident’s care plan included doing some housework. Although the upstairs is designed as two flats, those residents do come downstairs and mix with the others. The majority all eat lunch together in the main dining room. Other meals can be together or residents can use their own flats. Staff prepare most of the food and know what the residents like to eat. Residents were seen enjoying their lunch together and got any help they needed from staff. The menus and observation showed that opportunities for fresh fruit and vegetables – although not everyone’s favourite – were limited. One resident’s assessment information showed a need to eat plenty of fruit and vegetables but there was no record this was happening. If this is what the resident needs then it must say so in his care plan and care records must show that staff are providing this care. One resident required a certain amount to drink each day but the records kept showing what she had drunk were not accurate. The quality of these must improve to make sure she is getting what she needs. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19 and 20. Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Inconsistencies in the quality of personal and healthcare support mean residents don’t always get good care. EVIDENCE: Residents said they were happy with their care, liked the staff and the way they were treated. Observation showed that staff interacted well with the residents, were attentive to what they needed and had good relationships. Occasionally staff would tell residents they would only get to do things if they were good. This must stop as it takes away the residents’ dignity. One resident was in hospital and staff were taking it in turns to spend time there giving her support. All residents were registered with a local G.P. and staff help them get specialist support from the local community health team. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Again the quality of care planning and records let the staff down here. There was variable quality in the recording of peoples’ health care needs and health checks, e.g. eye care, tooth care and foot care. This must improve to help make sure residents are getting all the health care they need. Medication was kept safe and secure. There were good arrangements to make sure residents got their medication at the right times. There was a recent issue over the ordering of medication so that the right medication was available. The manager has taken steps to put this right. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 and 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents and relatives views are listened to and there are good arrangements for protecting residents from harm. EVIDENCE: Residents tell staff their views and concerns on a daily basis. Staff were seen to respond well to this. There were two complaints recorded in the complaints book since the last inspection. There were compliments about staff being friendly and helpful as well. The complaints were about the quality of care and made by residents’ relatives. These were thoroughly looked into by a senior manager. The complaints were not upheld, the relatives agreed in one case and have not responded in the other to say if they agree or not An anonymous complaint was made to the Commission about the temporary absence of the permanent manager, staff sickness and use of agency staff. The complainant was worried that staff in the home were stressed and it would have an affect on the residents. The permanent manager was due to return shortly after this inspection. There had been a number of staff off sick and the temporary manager was monitoring this. Agency staff had been kept down by using other care staff to cover shifts. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Standards have slipped since the last inspection mainly as a result of some poor care planning and record keeping. The permanent manager will be able to put this right on her return. There were procedures in place for dealing with suspicions or allegations of abuse. Staff knew what to do should they witness any abuse to help keep residents free from harm. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Legard is a well built, well maintained home for residents to live in comfort and safety. EVIDENCE: The Legard is purpose built, spacious, accessible and safe. Residents all have a single room with en suite facilities, including a bath. There are two separate apartments (upstairs), each with two bedrooms, a kitchen and lounge to share. These are aimed at promoting more independent living. Downstairs there are 4 more bedrooms, a communal lounge, kitchen/dining room, activity room, sensory room and laundry. Since the last inspection a bungalow has been built in the grounds, which has two one-bedroom flats in. Each contains a bedroom, en suite bathroom, and The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 open plan lounge, kitchen and diner. A resident with more independent skills was using one of these. Furnishings were homely and of good quality. The home was well decorated, clean and tidy. The home was well maintained and safety certificates were available for inspection. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 33, 34 and 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Overall staffing arrangements were good to make sure residents are supported by an effective staff team. This could be improved by making sure all staff get training when they need it. EVIDENCE: There are 4 staff on duty between 8am and 10pm to look after the 6 residents that live there. There are two staff on duty throughout the night. This meets the recommended guidance. Care staff do all the cooking, cleaning and laundry as well, where possible with the involvement of residents. The required checks are made on new staff to make sure they are suitable to work in the home and are not likely to harm anyone there. The home has met the target for 50 of care staff to have achieved the required care qualification. This is to make sure residents are supported by competent staff. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Staff said they get the training they need to look after the residents well. Records showed that although they got some initial training, further necessary training is not always provided on time in accordance with the company’s own training policy. This puts residents’ health, safety and welfare at risk. Staff training about the health, safety and welfare of residents must always be provided on time to avoid these risks. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39 and 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents would benefit from some improvements to the way the home is managed. EVIDENCE: There has been a slip in some standards since the last inspection and this has co-incided with the absence of the permanent manager. The manager is due to return very shortly after this inspection. Residents and relatives are asked their views about the running of the home and they say are happy with it. There were no available plans for developing and improving the service in future to make things better for residents. There should be one of these, without plans the service won’t develop and improve. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 A senior manager visits the home to check things are running well and completes a written report about this. Recent visits and reports don’t tackle the issues found during this inspection and should do. The home was safe and well maintained. Regular safety checks are made and records of these kept. This is to ensure residents continue to live in a safe environment. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 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 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 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 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 3 34 3 35 2 36 X 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 X 12 2 13 2 14 2 15 3 16 3 17 2 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 2 2 3 X 2 X 3 X X 3 X The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 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 Each resident must have an individual written plan that clearly describes all the person’s health, personal and social needs and what support they require from staff. This is to help ensure residents get all the care they need. Restrictions on a resident’s freedom must be agreed with them, their relative or representative and other involved health and social care professionals. This is to ensure a person’s welfare is not harmed. There must be better planning and arranging of opportunities for residents to choose from a wider range of social, leisure and community activities to help improve the quality of their lives. There must be better planning and arranging of opportunities for residents to choose from a wider range of social, leisure and community activities to help improve the quality of their lives. There must be better planning and arranging of opportunities DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 31/05/07 2 YA6 12, 15 31/05/07 3 YA12 12, 15 31/05/07 4 YA13 12, 15 31/05/07 5 YA14 12, 15 31/05/07 The Legard Version 5.2 Page 27 6 YA17 12, 15 7 YA17 17 8 YA18 12 9 YA19 13, 15 10 YA35 18 for residents to choose from a wider range of social, leisure and community activities to help improve the quality of their lives. Care plans must detail any resident’s particular dietary needs and staff must make sure residents get the necessary help. When it is part of some one’s care, staff must use accurate ways of determining a person’s fluid intake and record this accurately. Accurate records help monitor what people need well. Staff must stop telling residents they can do things only if they are good as this takes away their dignity. All a person’s heath care needs must be clearly recorded in their individual plans to help make sure they get the support to keep healthy. All staff must have receive the following training: adult protection, infection control, moving and handling, fire safety, health and safety, basic food hygiene, first aid and managing challenging behaviour to help maintain the health, safety and welfare of the residents. 31/05/07 31/05/07 31/05/07 31/05/07 31/05/07 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 2 Refer to Standard YA1 YA2 Good Practice Recommendations Information about the home should be accurate and not say person centre planning is used when it isn’t. This is to help people choose if they want to live there. The way in which assessment information is recorded and DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 28 The Legard 3 4 5 YA6 YA39 YA39 stored on file should improve making it clear exactly what a person’s care needs are. This will help ensure they get the care they need. The process of ‘person centred planning’ should be used to develop individual care plans. This will help improve the quality of care residents receive. There should be an annual quality assurance improvement plan describing how the service will develop in the interests of residents. Monthly visits by senior managers should improve to make sure residents get consistent quality care. The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 29 Commission for Social Care Inspection Hessle Area Office First Floor, Unit 3 Hesslewood Country Office Park Ferriby Road Hessle HU13 0QF National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI The Legard DS0000065035.V324412.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 30 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!