Please wait

Please note that the information on this website is now out of date. It is planned that we will update and relaunch, but for now is of historical interest only and we suggest you visit cqc.org.uk

Care Home: Ridgeway

  • Chapel Lane Newton Wisbech Cambridgeshire PE13 5EU
  • Tel: 01638569430
  • Fax: 01945870953

Ridgeway is located on the edge of the village of Newton that is located approximately 3 miles from the Cambridgeshire market town of Wisbech. The village of Newton has a post office/store, public house and a church. All of the shops, recreational, leisure facilities and other amenities can be found in Wisbech. Private transport is available to access the community. Ridgeway is a converted two-storey domestic dwelling that has up to a maximum of 6 places for people under 65 years of age with a learning disability and mental health needs. All bedrooms are of single occupancy and are provided with ensuite facilities. The home has a lounge, a dining area and a conservatory. Gardens are mainly to the rear that includes a tennis court, patio areas, lawns and fruit and vegetable patches. The current fee is £1500 per week although this can vary depending on the assessed needs of the person. Additional costs include those for chiropody, haircuts, subscriptions to satellite television and personal spending such as toiletries and eating out. Further information about fees can be obtained via the home. Copies of inspection reports are available on request from the home or via our CSCI website at www.csci.org.uk

  • Latitude: 52.708999633789
    Longitude: 0.13199999928474
  • Manager: Mrs Nomagugu Johwa
  • UK
  • Total Capacity: 6
  • Type: Care home only
  • Provider: Ermine Care Ltd
  • Ownership: Private
  • Care Home ID: 12986
Residents Needs:
Learning disability

Latest Inspection

This is the latest available inspection report for this service, carried out on 15th April 2008. CSCI found this care home to be providing an Good service.

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report. These are things the inspector asked to be changed, but found they had not done. The inspector also made 2 statutory requirements (actions the home must comply with) as a result of this inspection.

For extracts, read the latest CQC inspection for Ridgeway.

What the care home does well People are provided with a range of opportunities to live a good quality life. All of the residents` surveys said that the person knew how to make a complaint and who to speak to if they were not happy about something. What has improved since the last inspection? Following on from the inspections in November 2007 and February 2008 there have been considerable improvements in the standard of management of the home to include improvements in the home environment, staff training and staff morale; and improved care practices. As a result of these improvements the majority of the requirements made following the inspection in November 2007 were assessed as met during our inspection of February 2008. We have found evidence that the management of the home has sustained this improvement and improvements continue to be made. It is our expectation that this progress continues by internal systems of the home, rather than any reliance on our inspection and regulation activities. What the care home could do better: Care plans and risk assessments must be reviewed and provide more detail about how to care for people` specific health care needs and involve the resident in drawing up their plan of care. We have made no requirement on this occasion as we expect the home to manage this issue. Where medication is prescribed on a "when required" basis the care plans must contain detailed guidelines for their use. A requirement has been made about this. Records of when medication is given to residents could be improved. We have made no requirement on this occasion as we expect the home to manage this. The garden areas must be safe and well-maintained. We have made no requirement on this occasion as we expect the home to manage this issue. CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Ridgeway Chapel Lane Newton Wisbech Cambridgeshire PE13 5EU Lead Inspector Elaine Boismier Unannounced Inspection 15th April 2008 10:35 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.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 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.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. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Ridgeway Address Chapel Lane Newton Wisbech Cambridgeshire PE13 5EU 01945 870904 01945 870953 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) Ermine Care Ltd vacant post Care Home 6 Category(ies) of Learning disability (6) registration, with number of places Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 18th February 2008 Brief Description of the Service: Ridgeway is located on the edge of the village of Newton that is located approximately 3 miles from the Cambridgeshire market town of Wisbech. The village of Newton has a post office/store, public house and a church. All of the shops, recreational, leisure facilities and other amenities can be found in Wisbech. Private transport is available to access the community. Ridgeway is a converted two-storey domestic dwelling that has up to a maximum of 6 places for people under 65 years of age with a learning disability and mental health needs. All bedrooms are of single occupancy and are provided with ensuite facilities. The home has a lounge, a dining area and a conservatory. Gardens are mainly to the rear that includes a tennis court, patio areas, lawns and fruit and vegetable patches. The current fee is £1500 per week although this can vary depending on the assessed needs of the person. Additional costs include those for chiropody, haircuts, subscriptions to satellite television and personal spending such as toiletries and eating out. Further information about fees can be obtained via the home. Copies of inspection reports are available on request from the home or via our CSCI website at www.csci.org.uk Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.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 star. This means the people who use this service experience good quality outcomes. 18th February 2008 This summary includes information about a random unannounced inspection carried out on the 18th February 2008. The purpose of this inspection was to assess the progress made following the last key unannounced inspection in 29th November 2007. The outcome of the inspection is as follows: Standard 17 A recommendation was made for an alternative to the meal on the main menu to be made available. This recommendation had been considered. Standard 19 A requirement was made for people to have access to the relevant healthcare professionals. This requirement had been met. Standard 20 A requirement was made for medication to be given, as prescribed, and records of medication administered to be completed accurately. This requirement had not been met and was carried forward with a new timescale for action. An immediate requirement was made for delegated nursing talks to be carried out after the appropriate training and authorisation. This immediate requirement had been met. Standard 23 A requirement was made for all staff to attend training in safeguarding vulnerable adults (previously called protection of vulnerable adults against abuse or POVA). This requirement had been met. Standard 24 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 By the 1st March 2008 we required the leaking roof of the conservatory to be repaired. We received a letter, dated 29th February 2008, from the home manager, requesting an extension of this timescale. On the 10th March 2008 we replied and have agreed to extend this timescale to the 3rd May 2008. Standard 29 We made a requirement for an assessment of the bathing equipment and any specialist equipment, identified from this assessment, to be purchased. This requirement had been met. Standard 30 A requirement, assessed as not met during our inspection in November 2007, was carried forward with a new timescale for action. This requirement was related to the stained carpets in the hall area and stairs and action was to be taken by the 1st February 2008. Although this requirement was not completely met within the timescale of 1st February 2008 we considered that this requirement had been met. Standard 32 A recommendation was made for 50 care staff to have an NVQ level 2 in care. This recommendation had been considered. Standard 35 At the time of the inspection of November 2007, an immediate requirement was made for mandatory training to be booked for all of the staff. This requirement had been met. Standard 36 A requirement was made for a system to be put in place for staff to receive regular supervision. This requirement had been met. Standard 42 Two immediate requirements were issued at the time of the November 2007 inspection. The first requirement was related to regular checks of the fire alarm system to be carried out. The second requirement was for regular checks to be carried out on temperatures of hot water. Both of these immediate requirements had been met. A copy of the full report letter for the unannounced random inspection of the 18th February 2008 is available on request at our Cambridge CSCI office. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 15th April 2008 We, The Commission for Social Care Inspection, carried out this key unannounced inspection, by two Inspectors, between 10:35 and 13:40 and it took just over 3 hours to complete. Before the inspection we sent out surveys and although we received no surveys from staff or relatives and visitors to the home, we were pleased to receive 3 surveys from residents. Some of this information is used in this inspection report. We looked at documentation, spoke with people and staff, including the Manager of the home, watched staff working and had a look around the premises. For the purpose of this report people who live at Ridgeway are referred to as “person”, “people” or “resident/s”. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Following on from the inspections in November 2007 and February 2008 there have been considerable improvements in the standard of management of the home to include improvements in the home environment, staff training and staff morale; and improved care practices. As a result of these improvements the majority of the requirements made following the inspection in November 2007 were assessed as met during our inspection of February 2008. We have found evidence that the management of the home has sustained this improvement and improvements continue to be made. It is our expectation that this progress continues by internal systems of the home, rather than any reliance on our inspection and regulation activities. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 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. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 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 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 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 Quality in this outcome area is good. People have a good standard of information about the home to help them in their decision of where to live. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Two of the three residents’ surveys said that the person had received enough information about the home before they moved in although the remaining survey said that the person did not receive such information. All three of these surveys told us that the person was asked if they wanted to move into the home before they did so. There have been no new admissions to the home since November 2007- this standard was previously assessed as met, at the November 2007 inspection. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 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 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. People are supported in how to live the life they choose, based on risk assessments. Care records are adequate but could be better. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Examination of two people’s care files and discussion with the Manager suggests that although risk assessments and care plans have been developed these are to be updated and to be more person centred. For one of the care files no risk assessment or care plan had been updated since July 2007. For the other care plan there was no information to tell staff how to provide proper care and safe treatment for a person with complex medical needs. Another person’s care plan showed that when medication is prescribed on a “when required” basis there were no detailed guidelines in the care plan as to when and how such medicines are used. This is needed to protect residents from unnecessary use of medication. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 It was pleasing to see that a person had attended their care programme review meeting, although the remaining care file provided no evidence that people had been actively involved in their care plans. We expect the home to manage this issue rather than we make a requirement on this occasion. All of the residents’ surveys said that the person was able to do what they wanted to do any time of the day, including weekends. Two of the 3 surveys said that the person sometimes made decisions about what they were going to do that day; the remaining surveys said that the person always made this decision. We noted that people were supported, by care staff, whilst going to the local shops and helping with the gardening. A person told us that they assist in the kitchen area but know that they can only do so with support from the care staff. Care records identified pre-admission risk assessments although current risk assessments are to be reviewed, as reported in Standard 6 of this report. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 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 Quality in this outcome area is good. People are provided with a range of opportunities to live a good quality of life. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: One of the people told us that they attend college one day each week and this was confirmed in their care records. During this person’s care programme meeting it was recognised that employment opportunities were to be explored. People told us what activities they had been involved in and these included going out for a meal, a visit to a zoo and helping with the home’s food shopping. Although the home is not in walking distance of the local town of Wisbech staff informed us that they take people out in the home’s transport. In the afternoon we saw that all of the residents were either out with their family or had gone shopping. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 One of the people we spoke with, who was being taken out to lunch by their family on the day that we inspected the home, said that they received monthly visits from their family and this was confirmed in this person’s care records. Observation of the care staff and the people indicated that staff include the people in conversations at all times. People told us that they are encouraged to help with some of the daily tasks of the home to include help in the garden and kitchen and we saw that this was the case. A programme of people’s individual activities, to include wiping and clearing the dining tables, was seen on the kitchen notice board. One of the people said that they were “bored” because they wanted to start working in the garden although they recognised that the recent weather had delayed such activities. Discussion with the Manager and comparing the suggestions about food, in the minutes of the residents’ meeting, with the content of the menus, indicated that there has been a change of menu to cater for the requests of the residents. A person told us that they are actively consulted in the planning of the meals. The Manager informed us that the residents have fish and chips or other takeaway/eat out meals, such as burgers, when they are out and about in the community. A comment we received in one of the residents’ surveys said, “Wants to go to Sports Centre more, and wildlife parks. Less pastry, more healthy food.” Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 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 Quality in this outcome area is good. People are generally safe as they receive proper care although medication practices could be better. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Discussion with the people and observation of the care staff indicated that the residents are encouraged and supported with their personal care, including washing and dressing. The people were wearing clothes that reflected their own taste. Since the inspection in February 2008 the home has obtained a bath aid to help with getting in and out of the bath. Examination of care records indicated that people have access to a range of healthcare services including GPs, psychiatric services, opticians, dentists, district nurses and chiropodists. A specialist pharmacist inspector examined the practices and procedures for the safe handling, use and recording of medicines. There are clear policies and procedures on the safe use of medicines to protect residents and these are being updated. Medicines are stored securely for the safety of residents but Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 there is a need to record the temperature of the office where medicines are stored to ensure the quality of medicines given to residents. None of the current residents handle their own medicines since they have either said they did not wish to or were not considered able to do so safely. Clear records are kept of when medicines come into and leave the home and records are made when medicines are given to people. There were some unexplained gaps in these records giving no clear indication of whether medicines had been given or not. A requirement has not been made on this occasion as we expect this to be managed by the home. We watched some medicines being given to one of the residents and it was done in a way which respected their privacy, dignity and personal choice. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 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 Quality in this outcome area is good. People are listened to and are safe from the risk of abuse. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: All of the residents’ surveys said the person knew how to make a complaint and who to speak to if they were unhappy about something. Two of these surveys said that staff always acted on what was said to them; the remaining survey said that staff sometimes did this. We have received no complaint about the home and the Manager, and the regulation 26 report, for March 2008, told us that there are no current complaints. Examination of the staff training records and discussion with the Manager indicated that arrangements have been made for all staff to attend training in safeguarding (previously known as protection of vulnerable adults or POVA) awareness and procedures. Some of the staff have attended this training on the 8th April 2008 and, according to the home’s diary, the remaining staff are to attend this training on the 30th April 2008. The balance of a person’s personal monies (kept for safe-keeping by the home) was checked and this reconciled with the records. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 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 Quality in this outcome area is adequate. People live in a home that is comfortable although there could be improvements made to the external areas of the home to ensure that they are safe and pleasant to work in and to visit. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: Since our inspection of February 2008 we noted that some of the carpets have been replaced and these were of a good quality. One of the people said that they preferred the colour of the new carpets (deep red) to that of the previous carpets. The home was well decorated and, according to the Manager, there are plans to improve one of the communal areas to become more “homely”. We have agreed, in writing, to extend the timescale for a requirement to be met and this new timescale is the 3rd May 2008. This requirement was regarding the conservatory area. According to the Manager work is currently being carried out to stop water coming into the home, from the conservatory Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 roof although the work has yet to be completed. This requirement remains “active” as the timescale remains current. In March 2008 we received a notification to inform us that an accidental flood had occurred in one of the resident’s bedrooms. Examination of this area, and discussion with both the resident and the Manager, indicated that work had been carried out for the person to safely move back (into their room). Although we acknowledge that, during 2007, there has been extensive work carried out to improve the drainage system of the home we are disappointed that the general maintenance of the other garden areas have let the rest of the home down. These areas were overgrown with weeds, from the previous year, and there was moss on one of the garden paths. The home has a green house and summerhouse although neither of these has been used, since at least 2007 and both were showing signs of neglect. The home has a tennis court although, according to the Manager any person living at the home does not currently use this, this can be seen from the other areas of the garden. The tennis court, too, was in a state of neglect with moss on the surface and a tennis net lying on the ground. We discussed these issues with the Manager who reported that there are plans to improve the garden areas and to include any of the residents who wish to take part in such activities. Access to the laundry is via the kitchen and this could pose a problem with infection control, should any resident have difficulties with continence of urine/faeces. According to the Manager there is no current resident who has such difficulties. All of the residents’ surveys told us that the people considered the home was always clean and fresh and we saw this was the case. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 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): 32,33,34 & 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. People receive safe and proper care from staff who are well recruited and welltrained. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The home has 11 care staff and 10 of these people have an NVQ level 2 or above in care ie.90.9 . Examination of the staff roster, discussion with the Manager and observation of the staff working indicated that the home has sufficient staff to meet the needs of the residents. We saw staff working on a 1:1 basis with people including gardening and playing dominoes and giving the residents individual attention. Since the inspection in February 2008 there has been no new staff working at the home. Examination of two staff files indicated that all of the required information is obtained, including checks, personal identification and references. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Examination of the staff training files indicated that the training of staff continues to improve. Staff have attended training in safe administration of medication, care of people with epilepsy and care of people with diabetes. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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 Quality in this outcome area is good. People benefit from a well managed and safe home. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. EVIDENCE: The Manager was appointed to her current position in January 2008. She has a ten years experience caring for people with a learning disability. Since her appointment as the Manager of Ridgeway there has been a considerable improvement in the standard of management of the home including the number of requirements that have been met since the inspection of November 2007. An application to register her as the Manager of Ridgeway has yet to be made. According to the Manager no surveys have been carried out, by the registered owner, in seeking the residents’ views about the home. Copies of reports of Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 monthly visits, made by a representative of the registered owner were available and we have been issued with a copy of the report for March 2008. The reports generally cover people’s monies, complaints, and audits of other records, staff training and the environment. The detail of the report for March 2008 was less than that of the previous reports, including people’s views and comments about the home. According to the Manager this was due to other circumstances that took a priority. The Manager has taken action in response to people’s views about the food as part of the quality assurance for the home (see Standard 17 of this report). Records for fire alarm and emergency lighting tests were seen and these were satisfactory. Records for the temperatures of food fridges and freezers were examined and these were satisfactory with the exception of one of the freezers. The temperatures were recorded greater than minus 34 degrees centigrade. According to the Manager arrangements have been made to replace this freezer. Records for the safe storage of food indicated that action is taken when food is not labelled or the “best before end” date has expired. Staff training records and discussion with the staff indicate that the staff have attended fire training, including evacuation procedures and how to use a fire extinguisher. Staff and their training records confirmed that some staff have attended training in 1st Aid and the staff roster evidenced that each shift has a trained “1st aider” on duty. Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 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 2 25 x 26 x 27 x 28 x 29 x 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 x 32 3 33 3 34 3 35 3 36 x CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 2 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 2 x 3 x 3 x x x 3 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 YES Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1. Standard YA6 Regulation 13(2) 15 Requirement Where medication is prescribed on a “when required” basis the care plans must contain detailed guidelines for their use. This will protect residents from harm. The leaking roof in the conservatory must be repaired. Timescale for action 30/04/08 2. YA24 23(2)(b) 03/05/08 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 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 Commission for Social Care Inspection Inspection Team CPC1 Capital Park Fulbourn Cambridge CB21 5XE 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 Ridgeway DS0000067815.V358910.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!

Other inspections for this house

Ridgeway 29/11/07

Ridgeway 09/01/07

The Provider has not yet updated their profile and added details of the services and facilities they offer. If you are the provider and would like to do this, please click the "Do you run this home" button under the Description tab.

The Provider has not yet updated their profile and added details of the services and facilities they offer. If you are the provider and would like to do this, please click the "Do you run this home" button under the Description tab.

Promote this care home

Click here for links and widgets to increase enquiries and referrals for this care home.

  • Widgets to embed inspection reports into your website
  • Formated links to this care home profile
  • Links to the latest inspection report
  • Widget to add iPaper version of SoP to your website