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Please note that the information on this website is now out of date.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

Inspection on 29/06/05 for Ashmount Residential and Nursing Home

Also see our care home review for Ashmount Residential and Nursing Home for more information

This inspection was carried out on 29th June 2005.

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

The inspector found there to be outstanding requirements from the previous inspection report but made no statutory requirements on the home.

What follows are excerpts from this inspection report. For more information read the full report on the next tab.

What the care home does well

Residents were complimentary about the attitude of the staff. They said they were polite, friendly and caring. They spoke of a nice atmosphere in the home. Residents said the food was generally good and they got enough at each meal with a choice offered. The residents spoken with said they had large amount of sitting room space which they liked, especially the conservatory. They had enjoyed sitting in the garden through the recent good weather and said the gardens were kept well. A good response from staff was seen when emergency call bells sounded. Residents had not been accommodated without a thorough assessment of their needs being carried out first.

What has improved since the last inspection?

Two care assistants have had twenty hours per week allocated for activities. The residents said they really enjoyed this time and had been able to get out of the home into the local community. Some improvements had been made to the statement of purpose since the last inspection. Not all the information required to be included was present.

What the care home could do better:

The written information regarding how the residents care needs were to be met must be clear and up to date. Health care assessments must be reviewed when a resident`s condition changes. Although residents were happy with the food served the system of serving meals should be reviewed as residents said the current system left them waiting, sat at the dining table, for too long. Some areas of the home were showing signs of wear and tear and were in need of repair and redecoration. All equipment in the home must be safely stored. Window restrictors must be fitted on a risk assessment basis. The recruitment of staff must include all checks to make sure staff are fit to work with vulnerable adults.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home 10 Southey Road Worthing West Sussex BN11 3HT Lead Inspector Helen Tomlinson Unannounced 29 June 2005,07:30 th 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 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. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home Address 10 Southey Road, Worthing, West Sussex, BN11 3HT Telephone number Fax number Email address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) 01903 538500 Guild Care Miss Alison Lynne Wiles Care Home (CRH) with nursing (N) 50 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (OP), (50) of places Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 4 October 2004 Brief Description of the Service: Ashmount is registered to provide personal and nursing care for up to fifty people aged 65yrs and over. It is a large detached property situated in a residential area of the seaside town of Worthing. The sea front and shopping areas are a short walk away. There is a private car park at the front of the home and a garden at the back. Accommodation is provided on 3 floors. A passenger lift allows access to all floors. Large communal sitting and dining areas are available on the ground floor. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection. The inspector arrived at the home at 7.30am and spoke to the night staff on duty. She remained in the home until 5.15pm. At the time of the inspection 40 residents were accommodated. 18 of these were receiving nursing care and the remainder personal care. Over the course of the day 17 residents, 7 staff and 2 visitors were spoken with. Some of the residents were seen in the privacy of their own bedrooms. 4 resident’s files were examined in detail and others looked at for specific information. Other documents were read, care practices were observed, a tour of the premises took place and a meal was eaten with the residents. 2 staff files were examined. The registered manager was present throughout the inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? Two care assistants have had twenty hours per week allocated for activities. The residents said they really enjoyed this time and had been able to get out of the home into the local community. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 6 Some improvements had been made to the statement of purpose since the last inspection. Not all the information required to be included was present. 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. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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 Standards Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 1 and 3 The written document regarding the services the home offers does not contain all the information a prospective resident would need. Residents were not accommodated at the home without an assessment of their needs having been carried out. EVIDENCE: A statement of purpose was provided to the Commission in 2003. This did not contain all the information required by a prospective resident in order to make a fully informed choice. Various assessments were seen on the four resident’s files examined. These varied in the amount of information gathered. For the most recently admitted resident there was a large amount of information which was detailed and gave a good picture of the resident’s needs and abilities. Assessments from other relevant parties had been obtained, including previous nursing homes and doctors. Relatives information was also included. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 9 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 7,8,10 All residents had a plan of care. These were not always up to date. Not all health care needs were assessed. Where they had been these were not always up to date. The residents were treated with dignity and respect. EVIDENCE: The system within the home was that the residents who required personal care only were looked after by care assistants. The team of care assistants included senior care assistants. The residents requiring nursing care were looked after by the qualified nurse team. The district nurses were called in for any nursing tasks needed by a resident who was accommodated for personal care only. Four care plans were examined in detail. Others were looked at for specific information to be gathered. The care plans had details of the resident’s needs and how these were to be met by staff. Although a monthly review of these care plans had been carried out the plans were not always up to date when compared to the current situation with the resident. This was due to the Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 10 health needs assessments not being reviewed. The moving and handling assessments in three of the four files had not been updated for over 12 months. The manager said these were now kept in the resident’s bedrooms for easier reference for staff when assisting these residents. The assessments in the files should be the same as those in the bedrooms. Three of the four resident’s files had an assessment of pressure sore risk present. Two of these had not been updated one since August 2004 and one since August 2000. This despite the residents being at high risk and it being documented that a monthly review should take place. The level of risk should be reviewed to make sure the residents get the correct preventative care. Nutritional assessments were present on two of the four files seen. One of these was for the most recently admitted resident and was a thorough assessment with a detailed plan of care. The other had been written in January 2000, with the last weight recorded in January 2001. There was no further follow up. Nutritional assessments must be updated to make sure the resident’s current needs are understood and met. Whenever possible weights should be recorded regularly to make sure adequate nutrition is being provided. Some of the information in the care plans was conflicting and unclear. For one resident it was entered that they must remain in their bedroom due to a health issue, whilst it was also written that they liked to eat in the dining room. For another it was written that the resident “refused care”, including health care. There was no strategy written for managing this. When talking to staff they clearly had different ways of approaching the conflict between a resident’s right to make a choice and their duty to meet healthcare needs. Both staff and residents should be aware of their rights and responsibilities in relation to care needs being met. Some risk assessments were present on the files seen. These included the use of bed rails, storage of food in bedrooms and a falls risk assessment. These assessments were not fully completed and had not been reviewed. The bed rail risk assessments did not include any alternatives considered or the use of protectors. Bed rails were seen in use without protectors being present. This is a risk to residents and protectors should always be in place. For one resident who had suffered several falls a risk assessment had not been completed. The risk assessment for the storage of food did not include any safe management of this by staff, provision of equipment or alternatives tried. This had not been reviewed since April 2004. The use of risk assessments should be reviewed with any risks identified being assessed and a strategy for reducing the risk to the resident being agreed. For one resident who had suffered several falls there was evidence of good practice in that staff had sought to investigate the reason for the falls and got medical assistance which had resulted in no further falls for that resident. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 11 The storage and administration of medication was not assessed by the inspector at this inspection. During the inspection the community supplying pharmacist visited the home and conducted their own review of the management of medication in the home. There were several minor points raised and advise was given to staff. The residents spoken with said the staff treated them with respect and dignity. They spoke highly of the way they were treated when staff were helping them with intimate care. Staff were seen to knock on doors before entering and ensured bedroom and bathroom doors were closed when assisting residents with personal care. Staff spoken with were aware of the need to protect the residents privacy and had been trained on this during their induction at the home. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 12 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 12,13 and 15 Residents were happy with the lifestyle of the home. Contact with family and friends was encouraged and assistance given for this when needed. The meals were varied and nutritious. The mealtimes were not as enjoyable as they could be. EVIDENCE: Residents said the home was run to suit their preferences and choices. On arrival at the home at 7.30am six residents were up. They all said this was their choice and they liked to be up early. Some residents were eating breakfast in the dining room and others in their own bedrooms, as they preferred. Other residents were assisted to get up at various times of the morning to suit their choice. Residents said they could go to bed when they wished. Their preferences around the daily routine were documented in the care plans. Residents said they could choose where to eat and could have meals in their rooms should they wish. They could sit in any of the communal areas Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 13 available or in the garden in good weather. If they were able they went out alone or with relatives. Over the past two weeks, two care assistants had been allocated twenty hours to carry out activities with the residents, either in groups or one to one. They were seen to take residents out to the local shops and on the sea front. Other residents spoke about their outings and said they had “really enjoyed getting out and about”. The group activities included reminiscence sessions, board games and general group discussions. Residents were looking at old photographs of the area and talking about their memories, prompted by these staff members. Visitors said they could call at any reasonable time to see their relative. They said they were welcomed into the home and offered refreshments. They took their relatives out if they were able. Church services were held on a monthly basis and all residents were welcomed to join in if they wished. Residents had telephones in their rooms if they wanted this, in order to keep in touch with relatives. The meal served at the time of the inspection was wholesome and nutritious. Residents were offered a choice of menu. The residents spoken with said they enjoyed the majority of the meals served and got a good choice at breakfast. They said the meal times, especially lunch, were long and “you wait a long time for your meal while sat at the table.” During the inspection the lunchtime took one and half hours and some residents waited twenty minutes for their lunch, while sat at the table. They were not happy about this wait. There was a long wait for some of the residents between the main course and sweet. The chef explained that different ways of serving lunch had been tried and none had been successful in eliminating this problem. Many residents had meals served on trays to their bedrooms and it was felt this slowed the serving process down. It was discussed that the system for serving meals should be reviewed as residents were not happy with the current system. Assistance was given to residents on a one to one basis. There were sufficient cooks and kitchen assistants to make sure the care staff did not have to be involved in the preparation of food. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 14 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 16 and 18 Complaints were dealt with in a timely fashion with an outcome satisfactory to all parties. Staff were aware of how to protect residents from abuse. EVIDENCE: Since the last inspection one complaint had been received by the home. This was recorded and had been dealt with in a manner satisfactory to all parties. A clear complaints procedure was on display in the home. Residents spoken with said they would raise any issues or concerns they had and felt confident the manager would respond appropriately. Staff spoken with had received training on how to protect vulnerable adults from abuse. They were aware of their responsibilities in making sure residents were safe. Staff were aware of the procedure to follow should they suspect abuse had taken place. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 15 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 19 and 26 The environment was suitable to meet the needs of the residents. Some areas of the home were in need of repair and redecoration. The home was clean and free from offensive odour. EVIDENCE: On arrival in the home at 7.30am the fire doors were shut, except for those with automatic closure devices fitted. The front door was locked to ensure the security of the residents. There were large amounts of communal space, on the ground floor, which the residents said they enjoyed. Staff were aware of the correct fire procedure. A copy of this was on display on the wall of each resident’s bedroom and in the corridors and communal areas. Some areas of the home were showing signs of wear and tear. The corridors on the second and third floors in particular, where the skirting boards were Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 16 rubbed down to bare, splintered wood. The walls on the corridors were, in places, marked and in need of redecoration. Some bedrooms had been refurbished as they had become empty. Others, which had not, required redecoration and one had a hole in the wall. Several residents chose to spend their time in their bedrooms and they should be in a well maintained and pleasant environment at all times. The corridor on the second floor was cluttered, near the nurses’ office. The medication trolley and a table were on the corridor. Equipment, such as hoists, spilled out onto the corridor from a bathroom. The hazard of this equipment on the corridor was discussed and safe storage must be found. The home was clean and free from offensive odour. The staff were aware of the measures to control the spread of infection. Gloves and plastic aprons were supplied and worn. The sluice on the ground floor was out of order. The manager said a quote for the work had been obtained and it would be mended as soon as possible. The laundry was in a suitable place in the home. There was a designated laundry assistant who was aware of infection control measures. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 17 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 considers Standards 27, 29, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 27 and 29 The numbers and skill mix of staff was sufficient to meet the needs of the residents. The recruitment procedures were not adequate to ensure protection for the vulnerable adults in the home. EVIDENCE: The duty rota for week commencing 26th June 2005 was examined. This showed the number of staff, their qualifications and experience to be adequate to meet the needs of the residents accommodated. It was discussed with the registered manager that the numbers and skill mix of staff must be kept under review and be adequate for the residents accommodated at all times. The layout of the building, which is on three floors, must also be considered when deciding the number of staff to have on duty. The recruitment files for the last two members of staff to be taken on were examined. For one of these there was no reference from the last employer although this had been a position with vulnerable adults. The application form did not allow or ask for a full employment history to be provided for either employee. The system within the organisation was that the criminal record bureau and protection of vulnerable adult (POVA) register checks were done and held centrally. The registered manager was informed by telephone that the POVA checks had been returned and were satisfactory. This call was not recorded and no written confirmation of this was present. The manager was Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 18 reminded of her responsibility to ensure all persons working in the care home are fit to do so. The current system must be reviewed. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 19 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 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for standard(s) 38 Most areas of the home and practices safeguarded the health and safety of the residents. EVIDENCE: The accident book was seen. This was filled in correctly and the outcome of the accident and actions taken were noted. Staff spoken with were aware of the health and safety procedures within the home. The corridor on the second floor was cluttered, near the nurses’ office. The medication trolley and a table were on the corridor. Equipment, such as hoists, spilled out onto the corridor from a bathroom. The hazard of this equipment on the corridor was discussed and safe storage must be found. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 20 Several windows on all floors did not have restrictors fitted. This must be reviewed on a risk assessment basis. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 21 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 ENVIRONMENT Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Score Standard No 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Score 2 x 3 x x x HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 2 9 x 10 3 11 x DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 x 15 2 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION 2 x x x x x x 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 x 29 2 30 x MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score Standard No 16 17 18 Score 3 x 3 x x x x x x x 2 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 22 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 1 Regulation 4 Requirement The registered person produces and makes available an up to date statement of purpose setting out the aims, objective, philosophy of care, services and facilities, and terms and conditions of the home. The health assessments and associated care plans for all residents must be kept under review. The care home must be kept in a good state of repair and decoration. A programme for the works in the home must be sent to the Commission. All equipment in the home must be safely stored and not present a hazard to residents. The registered person must make sure, by carrying out the necessary checks, that persons working in the care home are fit to do so. Window restrictors must be fitted on a risk assessment basis. Timescale for action 30/8/05 2. 7 and 8 14 (2) (a) 30/8/05 3. 19 23(2)(b)( d) 30/8/05 4. 5. 38 29 13(4)(c ) 19 and schedule 2 13(4)(c ) 31/7/05 31/7/05 6. 38 31/7/05 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 23 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 15 Good Practice Recommendations The system for serving meals should be reviewed, with the residents in order that they are happy with the system used. Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 24 Commission for Social Care Inspection 2nd Floor, Ridgeworth House, Liverpool Gardens Worthing West Sussex BN11 1RY National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home H60-H11 S24106 Ashmount Residential & Nursing Home V233534 060705 Stage 4.doc Version 1.30 Page 25 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!