Care Home: Moordale Court

Similar services:

• 22 Sandown Road
• The Highlands
• Dilston College Of Further Education
• West View House
• Prince Bishop Court
• Park View (15)
• Craigmore House
• 1 Lanark Close

What the care home does well Number 4 Moordale Court is a small service providing a comfortable and pleasant home for the people who live there. Care plans and records were upto-date and properly organised. Family members of the people using the service said they were pleased with the care extended to their relatives and made very positive comments about the manager and staff. What has improved since the last inspection? All of the requirements and recommendations made as a result of the last inspection had been satisfactorily addressed. What the care home could do better: It is commendable that all of the National Minimum Standards that were examined were met and that there were no requirements made as a result of this inspection. CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Moordale Court 4 Moordale Court Lingdale Saltburn-by-Sea TS12 3DX Lead Inspector Ray Burton Key Unannounced Inspection 25th January 2008 09:30 Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.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 Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.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. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Moordale Court Address 4 Moordale Court Lingdale Saltburn-by-Sea TS12 3DX 01287 652948 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) Moordale Court Company Ltd Mrs Pamela Louise Richardson Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Learning disability (3) registration, with number of places Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 20th July 2006 Brief Description of the Service: Moordale Court is registered for the care of three younger adults with a learning disability. It is situated in the small village of Lingdale on the Cleveland/North Yorkshire border, and the three residents currently living at Moordale Court are local to the area. The building is owned by Endeavour Housing and is leased to the Directors of Moordale Court. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The quality rating for this service is 2 stars. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes. This was an unannounced inspection covering all of the key standards of the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults. The inspection was conducted on 25th January 2008. There were no service users in the home for the duration of the inspection but the inspector spoke to the manager and made telephone calls to relatives of all three of the service users. During the inspection a tour of the building was made and records and care plans examined. The current weekly charges range from £658 to £853 What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: It is commendable that all of the National Minimum Standards that were examined were met and that there were no requirements made as a result of this inspection. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 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. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 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 Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The homes assessment procedure ensures only those prospective service users whose needs could be met would be admitted. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: There have been no recent admissions to the home; indeed all three of the current service users were admitted when the home opened approximately thirteen years ago. The manager said that should a vacancy arise any prospective service users would be subject to a rigorous multi-disciplinary assessment process to ensure their needs could be met. Pre-admission visits would be made to the home to meet staff and current residents; overnight stays would be arranged. The manager stressed that, should the occasion arise when a new member had to be introduced to the group, compatibility with people living in the home would be of the utmost importance. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6, 7, 8, 9. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The homes care planning process ensured all service users needs were identified and met. Service users were placed at the centre of the care planning process and were supported to make choices at a level appropriate to their skills and abilities. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. EVIDENCE: The personal files of all three of the service users were examined; each contained detailed information about all areas of need, including social need. Care plans were well-organised and contained risk assessments and risk management strategies. There was evidence of regular reviews and person centred planning meetings taking place to which the service user, family members and appropriate professionals such as social workers, day centre staff were invited. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Service users were consulted about all areas of their lives and staff supported their right to make decisions and to exercise choice, however the level of their disability meant they were unable to make anything other than very simple decisions. Each had communication difficulties and staff employed alternative means, in addition to speech, to aid communication and help them make their needs and wishes known. Care plans and daily notes were very comprehensive and detailed and covered all aspects of the individuals care e.g. health, activities, mood, contacts etc. and showed how staff tried to involve service users in making everyday choices such as choosing which clothes to wear and participating in the day-to-day running of the home by involving them in activities such as taking their washing to the laundry and accompanying them on shopping trips etc. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Service users were treated with respect and presented with opportunities to lead fulfilling lives. Staff encouraged service users to take part in appropriate activities and supported them when engaging in community-based activities. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. EVIDENCE: Care plans, daily records and personal development plans showed service users rights and wishes were always respected and taken into account and that they were encouraged and supported to make choices about the kind of leisure-time activity in which they engaged. Records showed service users were able to access a range of activities: each attended a day care centre and staff at the home encouraged them to access appropriate activities both inhouse and in the community. Examples of activities enjoyed included: board games, arts & crafts, videos and DVD’s, visits to riding stables to see the horses, trips to the cinema and theatre, shopping, visits to local pubs and cafes Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 etc. Each service user had an annual holiday; this year two went to the Lake District and one to Spain. Staff recognised the importance of service users maintaining contact with their family and friends and close links had developed between service users, their relatives and staff. Relatives were encouraged to visit the home and staff regularly transported service users to and from their family home. The inspector spoke to three family members; each said they were satisfied with the care extended to their relative and said they were made welcome whenever they visited. They said staff kept in touch with them and informed them about any matters affecting the welfare of their relative. “I am very satisfied; the staff are very good and look after my relative very well. I visit every week and am always made welcome.” “I do not visit the home very often, however staff regularly transport my relative to and from my house for visits.” Each of the three service users had a meal when attending their day care centre each day therefore the home did not have a set menu but offered an evening meal that would compliment the lunch provided at the centre. A record was kept of food served. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18, 19, 20 People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Healthcare and personal needs were met by staff who provided support in a flexible manner in accordance with the wishes of the individual service user. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. EVIDENCE: Care plans contained information about general health, dietary requirements and details of any specific ailment or medical condition. Each service user had his/her healthcare needs addressed by their own medical practitioner and other community-based professionals e.g. Consultant psychiatrist, District Nursing Service etc. Conversation with the manager and examination of care plans showed the staff team understood the importance of delivering personal support in a sensitive manner that would ensure privacy and dignity was maintained; and of encouraging service users to be as independent as possible. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 None of the current users of the service was able to manage their own medication. Medicines were stored suitably and securely and were administered, according to the homes policy and procedures, by staff who had received training in the safe handling of medicines and had been assessed as being competent. Appropriate records of administration were maintained. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22, 23. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The home has a suitable complaints procedure and policies and procedures to safeguard service users from abuse. Staff had received training in adult protection. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home had a suitable complaints policy and procedures and in conversation service users relatives said that although they had not had reason to complain about any aspect of the service they knew what course of action to take should they ever be dissatisfied with the care provided to their family member. Two relatives said if they did have any concerns they would speak to the manager and they were confident the matter would be resolved. Policies were in place to safeguard service users from abuse. A copy of the “No Secrets adult protection procedure was available and staff had received training in the Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA). Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24, 30. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. The home provides comfortable and homely accommodation and meets the needs of the people living there. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. EVIDENCE: Number 4 Moordale Court is a pleasant four-bedroom house providing a very comfortable and homely environment for the people who live there. The building was maintained in good condition and was clean, hygienic and free from offensive odours. The décor in the communal areas was cheerful; furniture was domestic in nature and suitable for purpose. Bedrooms were individually decorated and furnished and had been individualised by the inclusion of personal effects. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32, 34, 35. People using this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. Service users were protected and supported by a competent staff team and by the homes policies and procedures on recruitment and training. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. EVIDENCE: Training records and conversation with the manager indicated the staff team had the skills and experience to meet service users needs. All new members of staff received induction and all mandatory training. Specific training was also given so that the individual needs of service users could be met e.g. Epilepsy Awareness & Rescue Medication. Of the seven members of staff three were qualified NVQ level 3 and three NVQ level 2. The Senior Support Worker was a State Enrolled Nurse, had successfully completed the Registered Managers Award and was currently undertaking the NVQ level 4 in Care. Examination of personnel files evidenced that prior to a new member of staff commencing employment two suitable references were obtained and all necessary checks, including Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) were conducted. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37, 39, 42. People who use this service experience good quality outcomes in this area. A well managed home with a competent staff team. The health, safety and welfare of service users were protected by the homes record keeping and policies and procedures. We have made this judgement using a range of evidence, including a visit to the service. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The registered manager has suitable experience in supporting people with learning disabilities and is the holder of the Registered Managers Award and the NVQ level 3 in Care; she is currently working towards gaining the NVQ level 4 in Care. Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Policies, procedures and records were kept to ensure the safe and effective running of the home; these were well maintained, up-to-date and stored appropriately. The building, furnishings and equipment were regularly checked and serviced to maintain a safe and comfortable environment. Staff training covered areas such as: Fire Training, Infection Control, Moving & Handling, and First Aid. The home had various quality monitoring systems, mainly informal, to measure success in meeting its aims, objectives and statement of purpose and to ensure service users best interests were safeguarded: person centred planning meetings, reviews, regular feedback from relatives and visiting professionals, an annual satisfaction questionnaire sent to relatives and others such as healthcare professionals. Comments made in returned questionnaires included: “I am happy with the care provided for my sister” (Relative) “Clear evidence of a person centred approach to enabling residents.” (Consultant Psychiatrist) “Caring, friendly, very approachable and efficient.” (Parent) “I find the care for my son is very good.” (Parent) Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 3 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 3 3 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 Commission for Social Care Inspection North Eastern Region St Nicholas Building St Nicholas Street Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 1NB 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 Moordale Court DS0000000064.V356904.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 - 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!