Inspection on 27/07/06 for Veedale

This inspection was carried out on 27th July 2006.

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

The inspector found no outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report, but made 5 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

Other inspections for this house

Veedale 27/07/07

Similar services:

Clover House

Parkside

Park Lodge

Mere Hall View

St Bonaventures

Hudson Road

Whitewalls

Home Farm

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Veedale Back Lane Clayton le Woods Chorley Lancashire PR6 7EU Lead Inspector Val Turley Unannounced Inspection 27th July 2006 09:45 Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.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 Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.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. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Veedale Address Back Lane Clayton le Woods Chorley Lancashire PR6 7EU 01772 335098 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) Dalesview Partnership Miss Lisa Warburton Care Home 9 Category(ies) of Learning disability (9) registration, with number of places Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The home is registered for a maximum of 9 service users to include: up to 9 service users in the category of LD (Learning Disability) N/A Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Veedale stands in its own grounds and has open views to two sides. The building is a single storey purpose built establishment, with wide doorways and easy access throughout. It is comprised of four small units, each with its own kitchen, bathroom and lounge area, allowing service users to enjoy greater privacy. The premises are on the same site as two other homes, Rowandale and Hollydale, which are part of the same group. Veedale can accommodate nine service users with a Learning Disability. The home provides nine single bedrooms. The rooms have been decorated and furnished with specific service users in mind and are all individually furnished. The bathrooms have been specifically designed to provide a suitable environment for assisting service users with physical disabilities. In addition there is a laundry and office. The gardens have been landscaped to the front and sides and there is also a large conservatory and patio, which service users from the three small units can access. The home is situated in Clayton-le-Woods on the perimeter of a housing estate. There is a range of facilities including a supermarket, library, leisure centre, public houses and park. These are within walking distance and service users from the home access them. Clayton-le-Woods is situated on the A6 which is the main road linking the city of Preston and the market town of Chorley. This means the service users also have access to the facilities offered in these towns. Veedale is a newly registered service and at the time of the site visit was not fully occupied. Four service users were in residence and it was planned to increase the numbers slowly allowing support staff and service users to get to know each other. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The key inspection of a service takes place over a period of time and involves gathering and analysing written information. A site visit was also made to the home as part of the inspection process and this involved discussion with service users, discussion with and observation of the staff working there, an examination of records, policies and procedures and a tour of the premises. A questionnaire was completed by the manager prior to the site visit. This provided information that was included in the report. As part of the inspection, the inspector used “case tracking” as a means of assessing some of the National Minimum Standards. This process allowed the inspector to focus on one of the service users living at the home. Records relating to that individual were inspected, as the service users had communication difficulties, staff were observed providing individual support to the service user, discussion with the support staff took place and time was spent with the service user. During the course of the site visit, discussion took place with other service users were this was possible. The basic fee at the home is £850 a week. What the service does well: Veedale provides a purpose built, clean, comfortable, well maintained and homely environment for the service users who live there and the staff who support them. The home a good approach to admission, undertaking a full assessment of service users support needs before admitting them to the home. Care plans were detailed and based on these assessments. They were person centred in their approach putting specific emphasis on service users likes, dislikes and preferences. The home had also commenced person centred planning with some of the service users and this should complement the care planning approach already used. Activities were arranged both within the home and in the community and these were assessed with a view to ensuring that service users could participate in them safely and successfully. The service users rights to make decisions and choices about their preferred lifestyle were respected and staff supported them to enjoy a fulfilling lifestyle. The staff team were well motivated and enthusiastic and were sensitive to the service users individual support needs and preferences. Health action plans Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 had been developed for the service users, providing guidance for the staff with regard to ensuring that their health needs were met appropriately. Health and social care professionals were involved appropriately and they provided guidance, support and training for the staff as well as working directly with the service users. The home had good policies and procedures in place to protect the service users and training was provided for staff in these. The registered manager was well experienced and in general managed the home well. She was in the process of establishing processes to ensure as far as she was able to ensure that the home was run in the best interests of the service users. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: It was recognised that the home was in the early stages of being established and that the registered manager had identified what things needed to be put in place in order to ensure that safety of the service users and staff. Much of this was revolved around making sure that the staff team received mandatory training in a number of areas and also accredited training in the management of medication. The homes recruitment policy and procedure also needed to be reviewed and updated again to ensure that the home adopted a good and safe approach to recruitment. The manager must also inform the Commission for Social Care Inspection of any illnesses, incidents or events in the home that adversely affect the well-being or safety of the service users. Some more work should be undertaken with service users to ensure that their views are fairly represented and that their needs are being fully met by involving independent advocates in the care planning process. Additionally, those service users who are able should be supported to become involved in local independent/self advocacy groups, giving them opportunities to improve their skills in making decisions and choices in their own lives. The possibility of involving service users in independent community based activities should also be considered, enabling service users to participate in activities which are not led by the home. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.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 Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provided service users and their families with enough information that helped them to make a choice of home. EVIDENCE: The file of one of the newly admitted service users was examined to see what information had been gathered before the service user was admitted to the home. The information was detailed with a care manager’s assessment having been provided and an assessment having been undertaken by a senior member of staff within the Dalesview partnership. The assessment information included details of the service users health, communication, mobility and personal care support needs. The service user had also visited the home before being admitted. A care plan had been developed based on the information provided by the preadmission assessments. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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 and 9 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home met the needs of the service users. EVIDENCE: The service users file examined contained a detailed care plan, which outlined the individuals support needs. It had details of the service users likes, dislikes and preferred routines. The care plan was still in the process of being developed as the service users abilities and additional needs were still being assessed and recognised. Although the service user had communication difficulties the care plan included information as to how the service user made their wishes and feelings known. As the service user had lived at the home for a relatively short period for time there had been no opportunity for a formal review of the care plan although it was clear from discussion with staff that there were almost daily adjustments to the care provided as the service users settled into the home and staff became more aware of the support required. Discussion with the manager and staff and observation of them providing support, indicated that there was a detailed understanding of the service users needs. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 The home had commenced person centred planning with some of the service users, this additional work should complement the homes already person centred care planning approach. The service user had started to become involved in a variety of activities arranged in the home and the community and others had been identified. These included swimming, drama, contact dance, sensory sessions and shopping. Where necessary these activities had been assessed to ensure that the service user could participate in them safely and successfully. The advice of involved health professionals was also sought in respect of some of these activities. As the service user had communication difficulties, the home should involve an independent advocate in the care planning process, to ensure as far as possible that the care provided is appropriate and meets the needs of the service user. Service users, where appropriate, should also be given the opportunity to participate in local independent advocacy/self advocacy groups to enable them to gain additional emotional and practical support. Discussion with the manager and staff indicated that the home had adopted a structured approach to dealing with any challenging behaviour with guidance and assistance being provided by appropriate community health professionals. The staff as a team were also involved in the development of strategies for management of challenging behaviour. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Working practices in the home enabled service users to make decisions about their individual lifestyles. EVIDENCE: From an examination of the service users file, discussion with staff, observation of staff, and discussion with a service user, it was apparent that the service users were supported to become involved in activities, taking into account their individual preferences and abilities. The care plan examined showed that the staff team had worked hard to establish which activities were most enjoyed by the service user and what staff needed to put in place to ensure that these activities were successful. The home had a two-week activity programme in place, which included individual activities for each of the service users. Some of these activities were based at the home and others in the community. The staff were also actively pursuing college placements for one of the service users and this was confirmed by the service user. The home had access to transport to enable community-based activities to be accessed. More emphasis could be placed on involving individual service users in additional independent community-based activities e.g. voluntary/therapeutic Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 work placements. Such opportunities may improve individual service users self-confidence and sense of achievement and may in turn reduce some of the more challenging behaviours that are sometimes presented. There was evidence that service user were supported to maintain family links and friendships. This was confirmed by one of the service users and another of the service users received a visit from relatives on the day of the site visit. Discussion with members of staff indicated that they were aware of the importance of these relationships and that they actively supported service users to maintain contact with family and friends. The routines within the home were flexible as far as this was possible, although the personal support needs of the service users did sometimes dictate some of the routines adopted by staff because of the number of staff and amount of time needed to provide the necessary support. The home should look at the possibility for introducing assistive technology into service users bedrooms with a view to enabling service users to control their environment independently for example the use of a large electronic switch to turn on the radio. Staff included service users in conversations and discussions but also recognised when service users preferred to spend time alone. All of the service users resident at the home had limited mobility and so although in theory they had unrestricted access to all communal parts of the home, in practice they were dependent on support staff to enable them to access all parts of the home. The staff at the home were very aware of the individual dietary needs and preferences of the service users. The speech and language therapist and dietician were involved in supporting staff to ensure that the individual needs of the service users were being met. Service users were observed to be able to take their meals in their bedrooms and the time that they preferred. A record of service users weights was kept to help identify any potential health problems. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 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 and 20 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were received appropriate care that met their social, health and personal care needs. EVIDENCE: There were protocols in place, which gave staff guidance as to service users preferred personal care routines at various times during the day. These protocols gave details of any equipment required to enable these routines to take place and the number of staff needed to provide support safely. Discussion with staff indicated that they were aware of these protocols. The home had good working relationships with a number of health and social care professionals who provided support and guidance. These include a speech and language therapist, a physiotherapist and community nurse. The service users were also supported to attend a range of health appointments dependent on their individual health needs. Each of the service users had a health action plan in place that helped the staff actively worked towards ensuring that the health needs of the service users were being attended to. The medication in the home appeared to be well managed with records well maintained however accredited training in the administration of medication needed to be provided to ensure that the service users were protected as far as possible. The homes medication policy was comprehensive including all the relevant guidance and detail. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 and 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home had good policies and procedures in place that protected service users. EVIDENCE: The homes policies and procedures that deal with complaints, the restraint of service users and the protection of vulnerable adults had all been recently updated by the company and contained good guidance for staff. The home had not received any complaints. Some of the staff team had received training in the protection of vulnerable adults. The home managed the service users monies well. A limited number of staff had access to their finances and a record with a receipt was kept of all transactions. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 and 30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provided a pleasant and safe environment for both the service users and support staff. EVIDENCE: The home was clean, bright and comfortable and provided service users and support staff with a well-furnished, homely and safe environment. As the home was recently built, it was in a good state of repair and all equipment was new. There had been some initial problems with some of the equipment but these were being addressed. Service users bedrooms were decorated and furnished with their needs and interests in mind. The home was subdivided into three smaller units and at the time of the site visit only one of these was occupied. The intention was to increase the numbers of service users in the home slowly to enable both service users to settle in and for staff to get to know service users well. The homes laundry was well equipped and was sited so that laundry did not have to be carried through any areas were food was prepared or eaten. The home had good infection control policies in place. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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): 32, 34 and 35 Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The homes approach to recruitment and training did not fully protect service users. EVIDENCE: On the day of the site visit, the staff working there were observed to be sensitive in their approach towards service users. The staff and service users were observed to be comfortable in each others company. The service users were seen to turn to the staff for support and guidance, as they needed it. Staff appeared to be well motivated and spoke enthusiastically about their work. The team was newly established and there was a mix of skills. Some of the staff had relevant experience and training from previous posts but others were new to the work. There was then a need for the provision of training to enable staff to fully meet the needs of the service users. This training need had been recognised and a number of courses had been booked. A specific training session in relation to challenging behaviour had already been held. Staff were being encouraged to undertake training and 50 of its work force had achieved a nationally recognised qualification in care. Records showed that staff had received induction training on appointment to their posts. The files of two recently appointed members of staff were examined. These showed that the home had an unsatisfactory approach to recruitment. One of the files indicated that references and Criminal Record Bureau checks were in place for one of the members of staff. The approach must, however, be further improved to ensure that application forms are correctly completed and include Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 a full employment history. One of the references obtained must also be from the applicants’ previous employer wherever this is possible. The second file examined did not contain all of the required information and it did not appear that all of the necessary checks had been undertaken. The homes recruitment policy and procedure was unclear and needed to be reviewed and updated to give the manager clear guidance and information and so enable every precaution to be taken to protect service users in terms of the recruitment of staff. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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, 39 and 42 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The management of the home did not fully protect the service users. EVIDENCE: The manager of the home had the relevant experience to run the home effectively and provide both the service users and the staff team with the relevant support. She has achieved her NVQ 4 and had also undertaken other training to keep her skills up to date. As the home had only recently opened the quality monitoring systems were in the process of being established. The staff team had each been allocated different responsibilities in terms of ensuring that both the homes environment and documentation were maintained to ensure the safety of the service users. Some of these checks had commenced and others were still being introduced. The monthly monitoring visits made by the provider had commenced and a report had been forwarded to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The home had not reported all incidents that had adversely affected the health and well-being of the service user to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 As the home was one of a group, there was already evidence that the company as a whole reviewed and updated policies as necessary. Systems and equipment at the home were also newly installed and consequently were in a satisfactory and safe condition. Staff had been provided with health and safety information within their induction training, but had not been provided with all the necessary mandatory training, including manual handling, food hygiene and fire training. There was evidence that some of this training had been booked however in the meantime the service users had been left in a position were their safety was compromised. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 X INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 2 33 X 34 2 35 2 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 2 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 2 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 2 X 3 X 3 X X 2 X Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 N/A 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 2 Standard YA20 YA34 Regulation 13(2) 13(6) Requirement Staff must receive accredited training in the administration of medication. The homes recruitment policy and procedures must be reviewed an updated to reflect current best practice. The home must ensure that persons employed at the home receive the training appropriate to the work that they are expected to perform. The registered manager must ensure that staff receive all mandatory training. The registered manager must report any serious illness or event, which adversely affects the well-being or safety of the service user to the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Timescale for action 30/09/06 31/08/06 3 YA35 18 31/08/06 4 5 YA42 YA42 13 37 30/08/06 30/08/06 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 No. 1 2 3 4 Refer to Standard YA6 YA7 YA13 YA16 Good Practice Recommendations The home should involve independent advocates in the care planning process to represent the service users best interests. Service users should be given the opportunity to participate in local independent advocacy/self advocacy groups. More emphasis should be placed on service users becoming involved in independent community based activities. The home should research the possibility of introducing assistive technology into service users bedrooms. Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection North Lancashire Area Office 2nd Floor, Unit 1, Tustin Court Port Way Preston PR2 2YQ 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 Veedale DS0000065017.V306069.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 - 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!