Inspection on 22/05/06 for Viewpark Residential Care Home

This inspection was carried out on 22nd May 2006.

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

Viewpark Residential Care Home 24/10/06

Viewpark Residential Care Home 22/02/06

Viewpark Residential Care Home 10/11/05

Viewpark Residential Care Home 21/01/05

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Viewpark Residential Care Home Viewpark 685 Moston Lane Moston Manchester M40 5QD Lead Inspector Helen Dempster Key Unannounced Inspection 22nd May 2006 2:15pm X10015.doc Version 1.40 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 Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for 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. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Viewpark Residential Care Home Address Viewpark 685 Moston Lane Moston Manchester M40 5QD 0161 681 2701 0161 681 2701 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) Viewpark Care Home Limited Elizabeth Ann Smith Care Home 27 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (27) of places Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. That the home only operates within its conditions of registration relating to service user category and numbers. The home may accommodate a maximum of 27 service users who require personal care only by reason of old age (OP). That care staffing levels do not fall below the minimum levels as specified in the Residential Forum Guidelines for Staffing in Care Homes for Older People. That dependency levels of service users are assessed on a continuous basis and staffing levels adjusted where appropriate to ensure continued compliance with the Residential Forum Guidance for Staffing in Care Homes for Older People. The service should,at all times,employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. 22nd February 2006 2. 3. 4. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Viewpark is an established care home, which provides accommodation and personal care for 27 older people. The home is in Moston, Manchester, which is to the North of the city centre, near to local shops, a post office and pubs. The home is close to public transport routes into the city centre and surrounding areas. Viewpark is a two storey detached property set within its own grounds. The home overlooks Moston Park. There are ample parking facilities to the front and the rear of the property. The gardens are extensive and well maintained with outdoor seating areas for residents and their visitors. The gardens are accessible via paths and ramps to enable easy access for people with mobility problems. The accommodation is provided on both the ground and the first floor with lift access to the first floor at both ends of the building. All bedrooms are single and a number of these bedrooms are large and exceed the minimum standards for size. The majority of bedrooms have en suite facilities. The home has a large lounge and two smaller lounges, one of which is the agreed smoking area. There are two dining areas located near to the kitchen. The home has large windows which provide a high level of natural light and Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 5 pleasant views into the garden. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 6 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was conducted by gathering lots of information about how well the home was meeting the National Minimum Standards. A questionnaire was sent to the home to obtain information about the residents, the staff and the building. However, this was not returned by the home to the Commission. The inspection included carrying out an unannounced site visit to the home on 22nd May 2006 from 2:15pm to 8:40pm. During this visit, lots of information about the way that the home was run was gathered and time was taken in talking with the residents and the staff team about the day-to-day care and what living at the home was like for the residents. Other information was also used to produce this report. This included reports about things and events affecting residents that the home had informed the Commission about. The main focus of the inspection process was to understand how the home was meeting the needs of the residents and how well the staff were themselves supported by the home to make sure that they had the skills, training and support to meet the needs of the residents. What the service does well: Residents’ needs are assessed by the home and most of the information is given by the resident and their relatives. This allows residents to be fully involved in how they want to be supported by staff at the home. Residents spoken to said that they were treated with respect and that their rights were respected. This is good for residents. The home has open visiting and residents and a resident’s relative said that visitors are made welcome. Residents, many of whom had dementia, were encouraged and helped by staff to make choices. This included choosing the clothes they wore and meals they ate. When watching the manager and staff talk to and help residents, it was seen that they were kind and respectful. Residents said that the food at the home is good and that they are “given something else” if they don’t like the meal served. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 7 The home was comfortable and homely and was decorated to a good standard. Residents’ rooms had their personal things in them and residents said that they were happy with their rooms. There was enough staff to support the residents and residents said that the staff were “very good”. Eleven of the 19 care staff had a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) Level 2. This meets the standard that 50 of staff hold this qualification, which is good. Two staff members said that the manager was “brilliant”. One member of staff said that the manager “listens”, that staff can “approach her with anything” and that she “supports you”. Residents also said that the manager was a “very kind person” and that “nothing is too much trouble”. This is good for residents. What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: Although residents’ care plans had improved, the home needed to make sure that the care plan was always changed when residents’ needs change, that things that put them at risk are assessed and that when doctors visit, the details of the problem and treatment are written down. The home needed to make sure that residents’ needs about food were written down and that the residents were weighed regularly to make sure that they were well. Some things about making sure that medication arrangements were safe had improved, but more work was needed to make sure that medication was stored and given to residents safely and that records were accurate. The home has a complaints procedure and residents said that they would complain to the manager who “would listen”, but the home needed to write down the details of any complaint so that how it was looked at and what the outcome was is clear. The manager and staff needed to be more aware of what to do and who to contact when anyone made an allegation of abuse so that things were done to protect the residents and to avoid risks to their health and safety. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 8 When recruiting staff, more careful checks of references and the information about their previous jobs needed to be made to make sure that the people employed are safe to work with the residents. Receipts needed to be held when things were bought for residents with their money so that the resident was able to see what was happening with their money. The home needed to send the Commission details of the regular maintenance and testing of the home’s equipment. The home also needed to have a fire risk assessment and to regularly do fire safety checks and get advice from the fire department about a fire risk assessment. 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. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 9 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 Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 10 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 the following standard(s): 3 and 6. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ needs are assessed and identified and most of the information is provided by the resident and their relatives. This allows them to be fully involved in how they want to be supported by staff at the home. EVIDENCE: The files of the 2 most recent admissions to the home were case tracked. One of these residents had been placed by the local authority, and the other was paying for care privately. The assessment made by the placing authority for the person placed by the local authority was in place. This resident had visited the home with their family and the manager had completed her own assessment during this visit, by gathering information from the resident and their relatives. This assessment was clear and detailed and was written from the resident’s point of view. The inspector met a relative of the other person recently admitted. This family member spoke highly of the manager and staff and spoke about the support the resident and the relatives had received from the home during the settling Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 11 in period. The relative of this resident said that the family visit daily and the assessment noted information given by the family and showed that they, and the resident, had been fully involved in the assessment process. The detailed assessments had helped staff to complete a care plan so that they could meet these residents’ needs. The home does not provide intermediate care. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 12 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 the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9 and 10. Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Although residents’ rights were respected and care plans, which included resident’ views, had improved, not updating care plans when changes in needs occur, not having detailed risk assessments for all areas of need, not recording the full outcome of medical professionals’ visits, not having clear nutritional assessments and poor medication practice could put residents at risk. EVIDENCE: Four residents’ files were case tracked. This involved looking at all the information recorded about them. The manager had worked hard to improve care plans since the last inspection and the care plans seen were detailed and were written in a way which showed that the residents’ views about their care had been taken into account. At the last inspection requirements were made about the need to develop care plans to include risk assessments about nutrition and pressure areas and to make sure that updated information is recorded appropriately. The home had included a pressure area risk assessment in each care plan and a risk assessment about manual handling. However, risk assessments were not in Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 13 place to cover all other issues in everyday life, which may put residents at risk. A requirement was made about this. The monthly reviews of residents’ care plans missed following up the outcomes of important information and were not used to update the care plan. This could put residents at risk. One example was a resident whose monthly reviews over a period of months noted that they were “very depressed” and “refuses to eat”. This person later was said to have broken a hip and at hospital “lost teeth and is unable to eat”. The later reviews did not mention the outcome of the depression or lost teeth, a nutritional assessment had not been completed and the care plan had not been updated to take account of these big changes in the resident’s needs. The resident had not been weighed regularly and the last weight taken was on 31/01/06. The manager said that this was because this resident and some of the other residents were not able to stand on the scales. It was recommended that a sit down scales was purchased and a requirement was made about reviewing the care plan and having nutritional plans. Wherever possible, residents kept their own GP when admitted to the home and visits from other health care professionals, including dentists and chiropodists, were arranged as required. When looking at the records about the visits of doctors, there was not enough information written down about the outcomes of these visits. One example was the record of a doctor’s visit to a resident noting “feet swollen”. There was no other information written down about what the doctor had said and what had been prescribed. A requirement was made about making these records more detailed so that staff know about the residents’ medical needs when their needs change. At the last inspection, the home’s medication was inspected separately by the pharmacy inspector. Eight requirements were made at this time about action that was needed to ensure that medication was safe. The manager had taken some steps to make medication safer. This included getting a medication trolley to carry medication safely around the home, getting a medication fridge, stopping secondary administration of medication and stopping holding medication for staff with the residents medication. The manager had also arranged medication training for staff which was planned for 30/05/06. It was acknowledged that some things about medication practice had improved. However, while medication was in a lockable room, it was not all held in the trolley or cupboards. Also, temperatures of the medication fridge were not being taken, controlled drugs in use were not entered in the controlled drugs book (the controlled drugs record had not been used since 1994), staff were handwriting changes in doses without noting a doctor’s instruction and the records for some tablets said that the resident was to take 1 or 2 tablets but staff were not recording how many tablets were administered. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 14 It was of concern that the medication administration records were not accurate. On the morning of 22/05/06, the records had not been signed for the administration of some residents’ morning medication. There were examples on all the residents’ medication sheets, of staff not signing the record so that it was not clear whether medication had been given or not. These practices could put residents at risk and requirements were made about them. At the time of inspection, antibiotics prescribed for one resident on the previous Friday had not been received by the home. The manager said that the chemist had said that they could not locate the prescription even though the home had faxed it and given the original to the pharmacy delivery person. The manager described problems with the supplying pharmacist and was committed to dealing with these issues in the residents’ best interests. Residents spoken to said that they were treated with respect and their rights were respected. Care plans also reflected residents’ rights and choices. This is good for residents. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 15 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 the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14 and 15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents benefited from the support of staff to see their relatives and friends and to enable them to exercise choice and control over their lives. EVIDENCE: The home has open visiting and residents and a resident’s relative said that visitors are made welcome. Residents, many of whom had dementia, were encouraged and assisted by staff to exercise choice in all areas of daily living, including the clothes they wore and meals they ate. All encounters between the manager, staff and residents were seen to be respectful. Since the last inspection, the manager had started to do a monthly newsletter. This contained lots of information about events at the home and residents’ birthdays and there was a section on welcoming new residents and staff. This is good for the residents. Residents said that the food at the home is good and that they are “given something else” if they don’t like the meal served. It was strongly recommended that a planned choice of meals is provided. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 16 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 the following standard(s): 16 and 18. Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. While residents said that they would complain to the manager, not recording the outcomes of the investigation of complaints and a lack of familiarity with, and appropriate use of, the placing authority’s protection of adults from abuse policy could put residents at risk. EVIDENCE: The home has a complaints procedure and residents said that they would complain to the manager who “would listen”. Since the last inspection, the home had received a complaint from staff about the alleged verbal abuse of residents by another member of staff. The home had not referred this issue to Manchester Social Services in line with the Protection of Vunerable Adults (POVA) policy. The manager held a copy of this policy, but was not familiar with it’s contents. The home did not keep a record of all complaints, which included the details of the complaint, the investigation and outcomes. This meant that complainants would not be able to see how the home had investigated their complaint. A resident’s relative had complained about an issue, the manager said that the owner of the home had written to this relative about the outcome of the investigation, but a record of this was not held. A requirement was made about this. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 17 The local authority’s Protection Of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) procedure was readily available at the home. The home had regularly informed the CSCI of any incidents that affected the welfare of tenants. Staff members spoken to were aware of the action to be taken in the event of an allegation of abuse and all staff had received training in the protection of adults from abuse, which was covered in the induction procedure. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 18 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 the following standard(s): 19 and 26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The premises was comfortable and homely and met residents’ needs. EVIDENCE: The home was comfortable and homely and all areas were decorated to a good standard. Furnishings, fittings and equipment were of a good standard and at the time of inspection, all the carpets and many of the other floor coverings in the home were being replaced. The home has attractive, well-maintained grounds, which are accessible to people living in the home. Some of the communal areas of the home and some residents’ bedrooms were seen. Residents’ rooms were personalised and residents said that they were happy with their rooms. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 19 The bathroom and toilet facilities were appropriate to meet the number of residents at the home and the home was clean and free from odours. This is good for the residents. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 20 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 consider all the above are key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29 and 30. Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Overall, the home’s recruitment policies and procedures were not used consistently to promote the safety and wellbeing of the residents. EVIDENCE: The staff rota for week ending 20/05/06 was seen and this showed that there was enough staff to support residents. The minimum staffing levels were 4 in the morning, 3 in the afternoon and 2 at night. There is also a third person on call by telephone in emergency at night. Residents said that the staff were “very good”. The staffs’ encounters with residents were seen to be patient and respectful. Two staff members were interviewed. They both described good teamwork and said that they receive regular supervision from the manager and that they can read the record and sign it. Three staff files were seen. The manager was providing supervision every 2 months to most of the staff, but she discussed the reluctance of some members of staff to be supervised. The manager said that she was concerned about the practice of these staff, so it was stressed that it was important that these staff were supervised regularly. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 21 Staffs’ files contained the records of induction, but one was not complete and was not signed. For all 3 files seen, proof of seeking CRB clearance and application forms were on the file. However, application forms had incomplete employment histories. This included one file with only one job listed. Two appropriate references were not consistently held on each file. One employee’s reference noted a disciplinary issue, but a full explanation had not been obtained by the home. A further disciplinary issue had occurred at the home concerning this member of staff. These gaps in recruitment practice could put residents at risk. In addition, the files did not contain an audit of staff training. Requirements were made to the effect that staff files are audited to make sure that all necessary information was on the file, employment histories and references are explored and a training audit is completed. Eleven of the 19 care staff had achieved the NVQ level 2 Award. This meets the standard that 50 of staff hold this qualification, which is good. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 22 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 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35 and 38. Quality in this outcome area is poor. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The manager supported residents and staff. However, policies, procedures and systems at the home did not consistently ensure that residents were safeguarded and protected. EVIDENCE: Two staff members were interviewed. They both spoke highly of the manager whom they described as “brilliant”. One member of staff said that the manager “listens”, that staff can “approach her with anything” and that she “supports you”. Residents also said that the manager was a “very kind person” and that “nothing is too much trouble”. The home had a quality assurance monitoring system and some surveys had been completed by residents. However, these were not dated, the manager Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 23 was not sure when they had been carried out and the information had not been collated to audit the service. This is important, as it would allow the home to take account of the views of residents and their relatives/friends about how the home is run, what is good and what could be improved. A requirement was made about this. Most of the residents at the home were supported by their families to manage their personal money. The home holds some money for residents’ purchases. The manager said that this is replenished by the residents’ families. Records of financial transactions made on behalf of residents were in place, but receipts were not held for transactions. It was required that receipts were held and that all transactions made on behalf of residents were signed by the person dealing with the transaction, so that the resident was able to see a clear audit trail of what was happening with their money. The pre inspection questionnaire was not received from the home, so full details of the regular maintenance and testing of the home’s equipment, including the gas boiler, portable fire fighting equipment, fixed electrical installation and portable electrical appliances was not obtained. This was discussed with the manager at the time of the visit and the information was requested. At the time of writing the report, the information had not been received and a requirement was made about this. At the time of the visit, the home did not have a fire risk assessment and was not consistently undertaking and recording checks of the fire alarm, means of escape and emergency lighting. Fire drills were not being consistently undertaken twice yearly and the outcomes recorded. A requirement was made that the home obtain the advice of the fire department on the completion of a fire risk assessment for the home and that fire safety checks and fire drills must be consistently undertaken. Regulation 26 visits were carried out and the reports were submitted to the Commission for Social Care Inspection so that the inspector was informed of issues at the home which affected the wellbeing of residents. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 24 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 Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 3 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 1 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 2 17 x 18 1 3 X X X X X X 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 1 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 2 X 2 X X 2 Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 25 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes. 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 OP7 Regulation 13 and 15 Requirement (1) Care plans must be consistent in the information recorded, reflect the current needs of the individual and be regularly reviewed and updated. (2) Residents’ nutritional assessments must be detailed and clear and the home must also have recorded strategies where any concerns/risk about a resident’s weight exist. (3) Risk assessments must be in place to assess all risks applicable to an individual resident, including the risk of falls. These must be subject to consistent review to take account of any changes. The outcomes of the visits of healthcare professional must be clearly recorded so that staff can meet residents’ changing needs. The Registered Person must make arrangements for the recording, handling, safekeeping and safe administration of medicines within the home . This DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 22/06/06 2. OP8 13 22/06/06 3. OP9 13(2) 10/06/06 Viewpark Residential Care Home Version 5.1 Page 26 includes: (1) Administering medication as prescribed, and ensuring that any prescribing changes are made by the GP or consultant. (2) Ensuring that the medication administration record is accurate and that the medication record (MAR) is appropriately signed at the time medication is administered. (3) Ensuring that all medication is stored securely at all times. (4) Ensuring that where necessary, medication is stored at the correct temperature at all times. (5) Ensuring that staff receive medication training. (6) Ensuring that the controlled drugs book is consistently used and accurate balances of controlled drugs are recorded. (7) Ensuring that when records state that the resident was to take 1 or 2 tablets, staff record how many tablets are administered. 4. OP16 22 The home must hold a record of all complaints, which includes the details of the complaint, the investigation and the outcomes. (1) Manchester City Council’s Protection of Adults from Abuse Policy must be a working tool at the home that the manager and staff are familiar with. (2) The managers and staff must have training/guidance in the implementation of this policy so Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 27 22/06/06 5. OP18 13 22/06/06 6. OP29 Schedule 2 7. OP33 24 8. OP35 16 9. OP38 23 that all allegations of abuse are appropriately referred for investigation. Staff files must be audited to make sure that all necessary information is on the file, employment histories and references are explored and a training audit is completed. The home must review and develop their quality assurance system to provide a verifiable method, which involves residents, to audit the service and report on the findings. Arrangements for managing the money of residents must be reviewed so that the signatures of staff are used for all financial transactions made on behalf of a resident and individual receipts are held consistently leaving a clear audit trail for all purchases made on behalf of residents. (1) The home must forward information to the Commission, which demonstrates that health and safety checks of electrical appliances, the gas boiler and all other safety checks specified in Standard 38 have been undertaken and recorded consistently. (2) Fire drills must be consistently held and the outcomes recorded at least twice annually. In addition, regular and frequent tests of the fire alarm, means of escape and the emergency lighting system must be made and the outcomes recorded. 22/06/06 22/09/06 22/06/06 10/06/06 Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 28 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 OP8 OP15 Good Practice Recommendations It is strongly recommended that a sit on scales is purchased so that all residents’ weights can be monitored. It is strongly recommended that a planned choice of meals is provided. Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 Page 29 Commission for Social Care Inspection CSCI, Local office 9th Floor Oakland House Talbot Road Manchester M16 0PQ 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 Viewpark Residential Care Home DS0000062168.V294302.R01.S.doc Version 5.1 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!