Inspection on 03/06/05 for The White House

This inspection was carried out on 3rd June 2005.

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

Other inspections for this house

The White House 20/06/06

The White House 14/11/05

The White House 24/11/04

The White House 24/05/04

Similar services:

Turret Villa Retirement Home

Moor House

Mendip House

Beaconsfield Court Care Home

Little Sisters Of The Poor

Manor House

Middleton Hall Ltd

Middlesbrough Intermediate Care Centre

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE The White House High Street Brotton Saltburn-by-Sea TS12 2PJ Lead Inspector Ray Burton Unannounced 3 June 2005 10:00 am 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 White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service The White House Address High Street Brotton Saltburn-by-Sea TS12 2PJ 01287 677106 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) Mrs A Jackson Mr R Jackson Mr R Jackson Care Home 16 Category(ies) of OP - Older People (16) registration, with number of places The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 24/11/04 Brief Description of the Service: The White House is a two storey detached Victorian house converted for use as a care home in 1985. The building stands in extensive private gardens and occupies an elevated site set well back from the road. The home is within easy reach of local community facilities and is accessible to public transport. Accommodation is provided in twelve single and two double bedrooms, none of which have en-suite facilities. The main lounge, affording a pleasant view of the gardens, is appropriately furnished and contains television, music, booksetc. A second lounge is a designated smoking room. The dining room also overlooks the garden. The home is registered to provide residential care for 16 persons over the age of 65 years. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This unannounced inspection was conducted on 3rd June 2005 commencing at 9am and lasting 4 hours. During the inspection comments were received from three residents, two members of staff and the manager. What the service does well: 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 White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 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 White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 7 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, 5 Prospective residents were given information prior to and after admission to enable them to make an informed decision about the suitability of the home and its ability to meet their needs. EVIDENCE: Examination of three care plans revealed that in each case the resident had been issued with a brochure containing a Service Users Guide, Statement of Purpose and a contract signed by the resident or his/her representative and a representative of the home. The contract stated the fees payable, charges for additional services, terms and conditions of occupancy. The manager said that all prospective residents and their families were invited to visit the home to meet with residents and staff. If visits could not be arranged a member of the senior staff team would visit them in their own home or in hospital. Of the three files examined one resident had visited the White House with her family. The other two were admitted from hospital and had been unable to visit the home prior to admission, however both residents had received an assessment visit in hospital from the manager and relatives had taken the opportunity to visit the home on behalf of their family member. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 8 The home does not offer intermediate care. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 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) 7,8,9,10,11 Personal and healthcare needs of residents were met by the home and there was evidence of multi-disciplinary working. Systems for the safe and efficient administration of medication were in place. Personal care was conducted in a sensitive manner that upheld the dignity and privacy of residents. An appropriate policy was in place to deal with the dying and death of a resident. EVIDENCE: The manager and staff demonstrated good knowledge of individual residents. Care plans contained assessments of need and action plans to meet the assessed need. There was evidence of risk assessments being conducted and of risk management strategies being developed. Monitoring of health was undertaken and healthcare needs addressed by residents own general practitioner and other community based professionals e.g. community and specialist nurses, dentists, chiropodist etc. Care plans were reviewed on a monthly basis to ensure that changing needs were recognised. Appropriate strategies were implemented to meet any changes that might have occurred. None of the current residents had been assessed as being able to control their own medication. All medicines were stored centrally in a secure facility and The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 administered according to the homes policy and procedures by staff who had undergone appropriate training. Accident records were kept of all accidents that had occurred during the last twelve months, most were of a minor nature not requiring treatment. Those requiring further observation or treatment were dealt with appropriately and where necessary had been referred to the Accident & Emergency Unit. The home was meticulous in recording every accident in the accident book, however there was not a system in place to collate the data collected and to analyse accidents that had occurred in the home. It was observed during the inspection that staff treated residents with respect and addressed them courteously and appropriately. Comments received from residents indicated they were happy with the way in which they were treated by staff and how care, including personal care, was delivered. One said, “All staff are nice and respect us. They look after us and are very helpful.” A suitable policy was in place to deal with dying and death and the White House was looked on as a “home for life.” Residents were able, unless medical needs dictated otherwise, to spend their last days in the home in the familiar surroundings of their own room being looked after by people who they knew. Two members of staff spoke of relatives as well as residents being supported during the final days of a residents life and of how family members were enabled to remain with their loved one. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 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) 12,13,14,15 Residents were able to exercise control over their lives. Staff encouraged residents to maintain links with family and friends and the local community. A healthy and balanced diet was provided. EVIDENCE: It was apparent from records, observation during the inspection and from conversation with residents and staff that there was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere in the home. Routines appeared to be flexible allowing residents to exercise personal choice and to maintain control over their lives, subject to individual plans and risk assessments. Meals were generally served in the dining room at set times, however there was a great deal of flexibility particularly at breakfast time with breakfast being served from about 8.15 until approximately 10.30 am. Three residents had elected to take most of their meals in the privacy of their own room. Examination of the record of meals served revealed that there was a healthy, balanced and varied diet provided. It was observed that meals were attractively presented and that alternatives were available should anyone not wish to have the dish of the day. Residents confirmed that the food was good and there was plenty of variety. The importance of residents maintaining contact with family and friends was recognised by the manager and staff who helped them to keep in touch by the sending of Christmas and birthday cards etc. and assisting with the making The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 and receiving of telephone calls (a cordless telephone was available to enable calls to be made in private). The manager said that no restrictions were placed on visiting and that residents could receive their family and friends in private if they wished. Sometimes residents were taken out for the day by a member of their family but, staff said, frailty and advancing years had lead to a lessening of outside activities. Some residents were said to receive Holy Communion in the home. Various in-house activities were organised e.g. board games, reminiscence therapy, gentle exercise sessions. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 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, 18 The home had a satisfactory complaints system and policies and procedures to protect residents from abuse and to safeguard their legal rights. EVIDENCE: The home had an appropriate policy and procedure for the handling of complaints that stated how complaints could be made, who would deal with them and what to do if not satisfied with the way in which the matter was handled. Examination of the complaints book and conversation with the manager revealed that the home had not received a complaint during the last twelve months. Policies and procedures were in place to ensure the safety and protection of residents and to respond to any suspicion or allegation of abuse. A copy of the “No Secrets” adult protection procedure was available to staff, who were able to demonstrate a suitable understanding of what constituted abuse and what to do in the event of such an incident occurring. Residents were encouraged and supported to vote at local and general elections by the manager and staff. Transport was provided by the home to take residents to the polling station. Most of the current residents however declined to exercise their voting right. A poster giving details of a local independent advocacy service was displayed on the notice board. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 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) 19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26 The environmental standard was good, providing residents with an attractive, homely and safe place in which to live. EVIDENCE: A tour of the building revealed décor and fabric to be maintained in good condition and the home clean and hygienic and free from offensive odours. All areas were centrally heated and radiators had been covered with suitable guards to ensure a low surface temperature. Hot water outlets accessible to residents had been fitted with pre-set valves to provide safe water temperatures. First floor windows had been fitted with restrictors. Lighting was domestic in nature and emergency lighting had been provided throughout the home. Toilet facilities were accessible from communal areas and bedrooms. The numbers and suitability of lavatories and bathing facilities met the National Minimum Standard and the assessed needs of current residents. Residents were able to access all necessary parts of the building and gardens via ramps and a stair-lift. Specialist disability equipment was available for those residents requiring assistance to access bathing facilities. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 The home provided comfortable and homely accommodation with furniture that was domestic in character, suitable for purpose and in keeping with the general ambience of the building. Most of the bedrooms had open views across the garden or countryside, all were pleasantly decorated and comfortably furnished. Personal effects e.g. furniture and other items such as pictures, photographs and ornaments had helped stamp the personality of the occupant on the room. The large and well-kept garden provided a pleasant and peaceful outside area where residents could sit. On the day of the inspection three residents were seen to be sitting outside enjoying the sunshine. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 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) These standards were not assessed on this occasion. EVIDENCE: The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 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 The manager does not hold appropriate qualifications in care or management. EVIDENCE: The manager does not hold an appropriate care or management qualification, but has recently registered on a course leading to the NVQ level 4 in Management. To meet the standard he must achieve a qualification at NVQ level 4 in Management and Care by 2005. The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 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 3 x x 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 x 28 x 29 x 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 2 x x x x x x x The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 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 31 Regulation 9(2)(b)(i) Requirement The registered manager must hold an appropriate care and management qualification at NVQ level 4 or equivalent. Timescale for action 2005 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 Good Practice Recommendations The White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 Commission for Social Care Inspection Unit B, Advance St Marks Court Teesdale Stockton-on-Tees TS17 6QX 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 White House B51-B01 S94 White House V231012 030605 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 - 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!