Inspection on 27/10/06 for WCS - Fairfield

This inspection was carried out on 27th October 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 there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

Other inspections for this house

WCS - Fairfield 08/11/07

WCS - Fairfield 11/03/06

WCS - Fairfield 10/08/05

WCS - Fairfield 30/11/04

WCS - Fairfield 07/06/04

WCS - Fairfield 11/03/04

Similar services:

Maple Lodge

Heathlands

Aston Court Nursing Home

Breme

Ravenhurst

Bank House

Inspirations

Westmead

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE WCS - Fairfield Butler Crescent Exhall Coventry West Midlands CV7 9DA Lead Inspector Martin Brown Key Unannounced Inspection 27th October 2006 09:10 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 WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.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 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. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service WCS - Fairfield Address Butler Crescent Exhall Coventry West Midlands CV7 9DA 02476 311424 02476 490018 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) Warwickshire Care Services Limited Paula Dutton Care Home 35 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (35) of places WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 11th March 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Fairfield is a former Local Authority, purpose built home for older people. Situated on a large housing estate in Exhall, it lies between the town of Bedworth and the city of Coventry, and is close to local amenities such as shops, pubs and a bus route. The home has good parking and landscaped gardens to the front and rear of the building. The home is on two floors and is organised into five units. The home is staffed over 24 hours by a management team, carers and ancillary staff. Nursing care is not provided, but service users who require the attention of a nurse can access one through the community nursing service, as they would if living in their own homes. Fees are currently £370 - £385 per week per person. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This report has been made using evidence that has been accumulated by the Commission for Social Care Inspection. This includes information provided by the home, in the form of a comprehensively filled out pre-inspection questionnaire, and thirteen survey questionnaires returned by residents. The questionnaires received gave a positive view of the home, but with some mixed criticisms, and showed, more than anything, a selection of residents with clear views about where they were living, and who are used to saying and writing what they think. The inspection visit was unannounced and took place on 27th October 2006, between 9.10am and 6.10pm. A tour of the premises was made, relevant documentation was looked at, and observations of the interactions between residents, staff and their environment were made. The care of a small representative sample of residents was looked at in particular detail. A large proportion of the residents were spoken to over the course of the inspection, as was the home manager, care manager and staff on both the morning and afternoon shifts. Residents, staff, and the managers were welcoming and helpful throughout the inspection. One relative was also spoken to, at their particular request. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Care plans are now in place on a consistent basis and are reviewed regularly. Medication practices and procedures are improving, with the home and care manager regularly checking the accuracy of dispensing and recording. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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 summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents moving to the home can be confident that their needs have been assessed and that the home is able to meet them. EVIDENCE: A resident was being admitted on the day of the inspection, from hospital. A Health Needs Assessment, done by the hospital, was seen, as was a Care Support Assessment, completed by the home manager and the care manager, following a visit to meet the prospective new admission. A viewing of a sample of care files showed that the obtaining of a Health Needs Assessment, followed by the home’s own Care Support Assessment, was now standard practice for all recent admissions. One resident spoke of her concern that people had been admitted to the home who were ‘not all there’, and that in particular instances, where confused WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 people wandered into rooms or made a lot of noise, particularly at night, the quality of life for others was affected. This was raised with the manager, who admitted that inadequate admission procedures had resulted in some people with dementia being admitted. She advised that this was due to inaccuracies in other people’s assessments, rather than the home’s, but that the home was now more rigorous in checking where ‘confusion’ or undiagnosed dementia might be a factor in an admission. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents are treated with dignity and respect, and health needs were being met in line with regularly reviewed care plans. However, residents, including respite residents, may be at risk if stated needs are not made fully explicit in care plans and subsequently catered for. Residents can be more confident that shortcomings in the recording and administration of medication, whilst still apparent, are being addressed more effectively by management. Further work needs to be done to ensure that effective medication administration and recording supports the well-being of residents. EVIDENCE: A sample of three individual care plans was looked at. Others were looked at to follow up individual issues that arose during the inspection. These are designed by the organisation to be comprehensive throughout all its service, and included life histories, health and social care needs, and showed evidence of WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 being regularly reviewed. They highlighted where needs indicated specific risks, and how this was managed; as with, for example, someone known to be suffering weight loss being encouraged and supported to eat at any time of the day or night. Where risk management requires additional detail, there are separate risk assessments included in the care file. However, one resident was noted, in his medication records, to have a specific health need. This was noted, briefly, in his care plan, as being controlled by medication, but with no further reference to implications for his diet or general care. The gentleman concerned stayed at the home on a respite basis, was very pleased with the home, and did not appear aware of any special dietary needs associated with his condition, other than having sweeteners rather than sugar in his tea. The manager acknowledged that not offering and encouraging a special diet for him during his stay was an oversight of the service. Serious shortcomings in medication were noted on the previous inspection, and these were followed by some reported errors in administration of medication that could have had grave consequences. The manager advised that procedures, training and competency of staff involved in medication had been tightened up, and there had been some changes in personnel. Nevertheless, there were still shortcomings noted in the Medication Administration Record Sheets. There were gaps in recording administration of some medications noted. The majority of these had already been noted by the manager. Where these were in ‘blister’ packs, these had been checked and found to have been dispensed, but not recorded. This was more difficult to ascertain in ‘boxed’ or ‘bottled’ medication, where a daily running total was not kept. In one instance, a medication count by the manager found there was more tablets remaining than recording indicated there should be, but it was unclear on what day, or days, the omissions had occurred. Medication records for each individual contained a photograph of that person, as well as brief notes on allergies and particular medical conditions. There were no brief notes as to what current medications were for. Staff, when asked, were knowledgeable on the reasons and effects of most, but not all, medication. The manager had added brief explanatory notes on some medications, but others were recorded to be given ‘as required’ with no further explanation. The vast majority of shortcomings involved creams, painkillers, constipation remedies, and ‘as required’ medications. The manager advised that all staff administering medication undergo a ‘competency’ assessment, involving observation and answers to questions concerning procedures and medication policy. The manager agreed that more immediate identification of errors of medication administration and recording would enable better resolution of issues of individual competency. The manager advised that the home is awaiting the delivery of a Controlled Drugs cabinet that meets statutory requirements. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 Staff were observed throughout the inspection to respond to residents in a caring respectful and professional manner. Individual privacy was respected. One staff observed dispensing medication was seen to be doing it in a particularly friendly and relaxed manner that was appreciated by residents in their rooms and had the feel of a series of social calls rather than a medication round, whilst still retaining an full awareness of the importance of the task. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14,15 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Most residents appear content with activities and lifestyle at the home, have contacts as wished, are supported in maintaining choice and control, and enjoy a varied diet in pleasing surroundings. There lack of awareness of the overall dietary needs of one respite resident was concerning. The splitting of communal areas into smaller units of four or five helps avoid any ‘institutional’ feel that a thirty-five bedded home might otherwise display. EVIDENCE: Residents, in both written questionnaires, and when spoken with during the inspection, were generally positive concerning their experiences in the home. While a few had expressed a wish for more activities, others had responded that they were happy with the level of activities. Many residents spent a lot of time in their rooms, and appeared content to do this, knowing that staff are available if needed. In this respect, the home appeared similar in some respects to a sheltered housing complex, with residents valuing their privacy and security, and many only using communal areas at mealtimes. Visitors were in evidence. One relative was concerned regarding changes to the communal areas in Rowan and Willow units. Formerly, each had a WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 kitchenette/dining/lounge area. These are being changed, so that there will be one dining/kitchenette area, and one lounge area. There was no evidence that residents or relatives had been fully consulted regarding this change. Residents were seen and heard to be asked their preferences. One lady became very distressed regarding toileting, and her wishes were respected, and eventually she became more amenable. Residents were generally happy with meals and with the choice, and make their views known when they felt they are below standard. There were conflicting views on this, with some being happy with meals when others were not. A satisfactory meal was taken with residents. The fact that dining areas are generally catering for less than half a dozen people helped the relaxed, homely, atmosphere. When I asked if there were any special diets, I was told there were not currently. It transpired that a person on respite stay had diabetes. This was recorded and yet no effort had been made to offer sugar-free alternatives during his stay at the home, other than sweeteners in his tea. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16,18 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home works hard to ensure that residents’, and relatives’, views are sought. Residents are assertive in bringing to staff attention issues that are of concern to them. The service works well to ensure that residents are protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: Complaints, comments, and compliments books were available on each unit. Also prominent were notices advising of the dates of regular residents meetings, as well as of monthly dates when the manager would be available at weekends to meet relatives who might wish to speak to her. An extensive complaints log was seen; comments on the returned questionnaires showed that residents were aware of how to make comments and how to complain. Residents were able to discuss concerns they had, and how these were addressed, and those spoken to felt that the home was responsive. Personal monies are at present held on behalf of thirteen residents, either at their, or family’s requests, largely to ensure that there is money readily available for hairdressing, trips or items that may be required at short notice. Satisfactory records were seen for these. They are audited every six months by the organisation’s head office. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Staff showed a good awareness of abuse and what to do if it is witnessed or reported. Observed practice showed a positive, respectful approach to all service users. Appropriate policies and procedures in respect of abuse and allegations of abuse continue to be in place. There continue to be no allegations or suspicions of abuse of any form. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 20,21,23,24,25,26 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents benefit from a clean, pleasant, well-planned environment and the breaking up of a large home into smaller, more ‘homely’ units. Some maintenance and refurbishment is needed to ensure that the surroundings remain pleasant. It would be a backward step to have people eating in larger, rather than smaller settings, and may further result in residents opting out of being in communal spaces. EVIDENCE: The home was clean, hygienic, and free from unpleasant odours during this unannounced inspection. Laundry staff were able to explain how the laundry system continues to ensure that infection risks from dirty laundry is kept to an absolute minimum. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The home is well-maintained, and spoken of highly by residents. Hallways are adequately, rather than well, lit. The manager is hopeful of lighting being replaced by brighter lighting that would assist those with visual difficulties. The home is divided into smaller units that help give it a more homely feel, with smaller, ‘domestic’ scale lounges and dining rooms. Two of these have recently been amalgamated, so that there is now a kitchenette/dining area for around eleven people, and a lounge for a similar number, rather than separate lounge and dining /kitchenette areas for half a dozen people or less. The manager saw this as a positive step, but one relative spoken to saw it as a cost-cutting exercise. The trend in most service-user led establishments would normally be for smaller-scale communal facilities. Whichever view prevails, it is clear that one aspect of the current arrangements, whereby the designated lounge still has a poorly maintained kitchenette, with some ill-matching armchairs, used by no-one, found favour with nobody. Throughout, the kitchenettes were the least well-maintained aspect of the home, one featuring a missing door, and others looking tired and in a poor state. Residents were generally pleased with their bedrooms, which were generally roomy and decorated and furnished according to people’s wishes. Doors were identical, distinguished only by numbers. The manager advised that she would like to see doors personalised, with names or other distinguishing features, and ‘proper’ front door handles and knockers. Several residents commented favourably on the views from their bedrooms and other windows. Residents also enjoy a courtyard and a pleasant, accessible garden in suitable weather. Bathrooms were all clean and well-maintained, with small decorative touches to make them homely. One downstairs bathroom was marred by a rail of work uniforms in one corner. The manager advised that they could find nowhere else for them. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29,30 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents benefit from a mix of well-motivated staff able to meet their needs in a friendly, respectful manner. The adoption of standard staff development plans should help clarify staff needs, and give more confidence that all staff are recruited and trained in accordance with set guidelines. EVIDENCE: Sufficient staff were on duty, including kitchen, laundry, and cleaning staff, to meet the needs of the residents in the home. A sample of three staff files was looked at. Criminal Record Bureau checks were seen to be in place. There was evidence of only one satisfactory reference for one recent member of staff. There was no clear evidence of an induction procedure for one staff member. The manager advised that Warwickshire Care Services Personal Development Plans were in place, ready to be completed for all staff. These appeared to be a good document for recording staff details, including induction processes, strengths and needs, and training. The manager advised that these were now ready to be implemented. Staff spoken to showed a good knowledge of their roles and had the skills and training in mandatory areas to fulfil those roles. A rolling program is in place to ensure a sufficient number of staff are undertaking relevant National Vocational Qualifications. The assessor was in the building during the WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 inspection, and advised she had a waiting list of staff from the home waiting to gain the relevant qualifications. Throughout, staff showed skill and understanding in supporting residents, physically and emotionally. One resident commented: “Things are right here. Staff are here for us, and do as we ask – not the other way round”. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,33,35,38 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents can feel confident that the home is being run in their best interests. Reassessing the fire precautions in the home will enhance residents’ health and safety within the building. EVIDENCE: The current manager has been in post for less than a year and is expected to complete her Registered Manager’s Award by early 2007. Monthly visits by the provider, as required by Regulation 26 of the Care Standards Act, now take place. Results of the previous year’s quality assurance exercise by the organisation were available. The home is receptive to concerns raised by residents, residents’ meetings take place regularly, and the manager WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 regularly makes herself available to discuss concerns with relatives and residents, helping residents feel confident that the home is run for them. The Pre-Inspection Questionnaire, returned by the manager prior to the inspection, showed that necessary Health and Safety checks are up-to-date. Bedroom doors, although fire doors, do not have automatic closures on. Many residents preferred to have their doors open during the day. There are fire doors, with automatic closures, at intervals along the corridor, as well as on lounges and kitchens. Although generally knowledgeable on the fire procedure, some staff were not entirely clear concerning their ensuring all residents’ bedrooms doors were shut before evacuating a section of the building. The manager is to raise these issues with the local fire officer and make any necessary alterations to the fire risk assessment and evacuation procedure. One resident expressed her frustrations at one point by rattling her bedroom door. The manager agreed that this indicated that this door may consequently not be an effective smoke barrier, and would have it checked. WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 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 X HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 2 9 2 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 3 17 X 18 3 2 3 3 X 3 3 3 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 2 30 2 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 X 3 X 3 X X 2 WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 OP8 Regulation 12(1) Requirement The assessed needs of residents, including those who are there on a respite basis, must be fully responded to. The manager must make arrangements for the safe handling, storage and recording of medication in accordance with the home’s policy and procedure. (This requirement is outstanding from the previous inspection). Clear written guideline must be available to staff informing them of the circumstances for when as required medication is to be administered. All gaps on MAR charts must be investigated and appropriate action taken. (This requirement is outstanding from the previous inspection). The doorframe to a downstairs shower room requires attention. Kitchenettes must be renovated; Rowan kitchenette is at present particularly unsuitable. Evidence of two references is DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 06/11/06 2. OP9 13(2) 06/11/06 3. OP9 13(2) 06/11/06 4. OP9 13(2) 06/11/06 5. 6. 7. OP19 OP19 OP29 23(2) 23(2) 19 06/12/06 06/01/07 06/11/06 Page 25 WCS - Fairfield Version 5.2 8. 9. 10. OP30 OP38 OP38 18(1) 23(4) 23(4) required for all staff appointed. Evidence of an induction procedure must be in place for all new staff. An updated fire assessment is required, following consultation with the local fire officer. The downstairs bedroom fire door that ‘rattles’ must be checked to ensure its effectiveness as a smoke seal has not been compromised. 06/11/06 06/12/06 06/11/06 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 OP9 Good Practice Recommendations It is strongly recommended that daily running totals are kept of all non-blistered medication is kept to identity errors more readily, until an acceptable general level of competence has been reached. It is recommended that the home obtain a Controlled Drugs cabinet, which complies with the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973. It is recommended that full consultation take place regarding changes to Rowan/Willows lounge and kitchens, before they are finalised. It is recommended that consideration be given to personalising residents’ doors. Bathing areas should not be used as storage areas for clothing. It is recommended that the downstairs hall is renovated, with attention paid to improving lighting there. 2. OP9 3. 4. 5. 6. OP33 OP23 OP21 OP19 WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Leamington Spa Office Imperial Court Holly Walk Leamington Spa CV32 4YB National Enquiry Line: Telephone: 0845 015 0120 or 0191 233 3323 Textphone: 0845 015 2255 or 0191 233 3588 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI WCS - Fairfield DS0000004264.V317081.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 27 - 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!