Inspection on 22/02/07 for Grove Park Nursing Home

This inspection was carried out on 22nd February 2007.

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

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Grove Park Nursing Home 05/11/08

Grove Park Nursing Home 21/11/07

Grove Park Nursing Home 03/02/06

Grove Park Nursing Home 30/09/05

Grove Park Nursing Home 10/11/04

Grove Park Nursing Home 13/04/04

Grove Park Nursing Home 18/12/03

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/07/2008.

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Grove Park Nursing Home 9 Plymouth Grove West Manchester M13 0AQ Lead Inspector Sue Henstock Unannounced Inspection 22nd February 2007 10:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Older People. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Grove Park Nursing Home Address 9 Plymouth Grove West Manchester M13 0AQ 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) 0161 273 4557 0161 273 8456 gillespie170@aol.com Roja Limited Mr John Gillespie Care Home 20 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (20), Mental registration, with number disorder, excluding learning disability or of places dementia (20), Mental Disorder, excluding learning disability or dementia - over 65 years of age (20) Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The maximum number of service users requiring nursing care by reason of mental disorder or dementia shall be 20 aged 50 years and over. Two named service users currently accommodated require nursing care by reason of mental disorder but are below 50 years of age. 3rd February 2006 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Grove Park Nursing Home is registered to provide nursing care for up to 20 residents, aged 50 years and over with a diagnosis of mental disorder or dementia. Grove Park is a large home that has been extended to improve accommodation and increase the number of single rooms available. Accommodation is situated over three floors and comprises of 18 single rooms and one double room. One single room has en-suite facilities and all other rooms have wash hand basin facilities. There is a smoking lounge, which is fitted with an electronic ventilation system and a lounge/dining room situated on the ground floor. There is a passenger lift to assist residents to their bedrooms on the first and second floors of the home. There are large garden areas and ample parking facilities at the front and rear of the property. The home is situated in Plymouth Grove West in the Longsight area of Central Manchester close to local shops, public houses, leisure facilities and amenities. The home is close to public transport routes to the City Centre and South Manchester areas. The fees, at the time of the inspection visit, ranged from £412 - £898 Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was an unannounced inspection site visit to the home as part of the inspection process. The visit took place on Thursday 22nd February 2007. The manager of the home was present during the inspection. A selection of care plans, medication records, staff records, and maintenance records were inspected, and a tour of the building was undertaken. The opportunity was taken throughout the inspection visit to speak to residents and staff. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? The home has purchased induction and training workbooks from Mulberry House, which have been introduced for all new staff. There was evidence of staff attending training in mental health, health and safety and the protection of vulnerable adults. The Service User Guide and the Statement of Purpose were updated in April 2006. The home has introduced regular meetings with residents to seek their views. There was evidence of continued work in progress to improve the fabric of the home and a new ‘wet room’ was being built on the top floor to provide additional bathing facilities for residents. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. The summary of this inspection report can be made available in other formats on request. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–6) Health and Personal Care (Standards 7-11) Daily Life and Social Activities (Standards 12-15) Complaints and Protection (Standards 16-18) Environment (Standards 19-26) Staffing (Standards 27-30) Management and Administration (Standards 31-38) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 1,2,3,4,5 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The needs of prospective residents were assessed prior to admission and they were provided with sufficient information to help them make an informed choice about the home. EVIDENCE: The manager described the referral and assessment process. On receipt of a referral the manager visits the prospective resident to carry out an assessment to determine if the home can meet their needs. Referrals were received mainly from social workers in Manchester who provided the home with a copy of the MANCAT assessment form. Most residents were admitted to the home from other services or hospital, rather than the family home. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 There are opportunities for prospective residents to visit the home prior to moving. There were opportunities for them to stay over the weekend but most visited for the afternoon or part of the day. The manager was conscious of the need for compatibility when assessing people to move into the home, taking into account the needs of people already living in the home. Copies of the service user guide and statement of purpose were made available to residents and details were also sent to their social worker. The manager said many residents did not keep their copies but there were copies available in the office. The Service User Guide and Statement of Purpose were updated in April 2006. CSCI contact details were updated in the master documents during the inspection visit. The home did not provide a separate contract as all residents were referred to the service via the statutory sector, and had a community care assessment. Many residents did not receive regular visits from family or relatives, although a small number of residents visited their families weekly. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7,8,9,10,11. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents’ needs were clearly identified in their care plans, and their needs appeared to be met. EVIDENCE: There were individual care plans in place. Individual files seen contained all relevant details, including details of residents’ CPA key workers, risk assessments, property register, weight/BP charts, medication profiles, appointments and letters, optical prescriptions, and manual handling and lifting assessments (where required). One resident’ file contained MANCAS and STAR (Salford Tool for Assessment of Risk). Two of the files seen had a form with details of wishes linked to ‘death and dying’. Daily records were brief but everything was up to date, signed and dated. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Medication records, storage and administration all appeared to be in order. Medications were kept in a locked cabinet, which was in a locked cupboard. Most medication was in blister packs. Individual medication records were inspected for residents’ case tracked (JO, RD, GS, TS) and all were correct. The UKCC position statement on covert administration of medication was on display, along with CSCI professional advice on the safe disposal of medications. There was a sheet with staff specimen signatures and every MARs had a photograph of the individual resident. Privacy for residents sharing a bedroom was provided through curtain screens and staff members were observed to treat residents in a respectful manner. Interactions between staff and residents suggested they had a good rapport. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,14,15. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home supported residents to maintain contact with their families, and encouraged them to get involved with activities within the home and the community. EVIDENCE: The home had an open policy for visitors, although preferred not to have visitors over mealtimes, unless prearranged. Residents religious needs were met, with Sister Mary Magdalen visited fortnightly to say mass, and one resident attended the local RC church on a daily basis. Breakfast was served from around 8.00 am until 10.00, with residents getting up at different times. Lunch was served 12.30 until 1.30, which was a light meal, soup and sandwiches. The main meal of the day was served around 5.30. Biscuits, scones and tea were provided at suppertime. Tea and coffee was available throughout the day. In addition to the main kitchen there was a small kitchen where staff could make refreshments and light snacks. The manager said there was not open access to the small kitchen as some Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 residents would drink 50 – 60 cups of tea/coffee a day if the kitchen was open. Consequently the kitchen was kept locked but staff were always available to get drinks for people. Residents spoken to confirmed that refreshments were always available. The chef did a monthly menu, providing a choice of meals. She usually checked with people the day before about their preferences but recognised people would often change their minds. Residents preferred traditional food, particularly meat and two vegetables. Residents spoken to said the food was excellent and the highlight of the week was Sunday breakfast, which was a full English cooked breakfast, and a Sunday roast dinner later afternoon. At the time of the inspection there were no special dietary requirements. One resident had diabetes and the chef made sure there was an alternative to sweet puddings for him. An Asian resident had most of his meals with relatives who lived locally, and another resident preferred to make her own meals in the small kitchen. A butcher made weekly deliveries and fresh fruit and vegetables were also delivered weekly, with the chef doing top up shopping as required. She had a budget for approximately £1300 for the month. There was always fresh fruit available and the food cupboards were well stocked with a wide range of food. The manager said the home did not pursue a rehabilitation model as residents had already been through rehabilitation before moving into the home. The home has a more relaxed approach, with residents very much in control of what they did on a daily basis. People could come and go as they pleased. Most were fairly independent, looking after themselves, going out to local shops, pubs, and other facilities in the local community. Residents said they enjoyed trips out, particularly in the warmer weather, and described trips to Chester and Blackpool taken the previous summer. They also enjoyed B-B-Qs in the garden in the summer. Staff provided a laundry service for residents and general domestic duties, although residents were encouraged to keep their bedrooms tidy. Residents said the staff were very helpful. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16,17,18. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The homes policies and procedures should protect residents from abuse and protect their rights. EVIDENCE: There were copies of the complaints policy and questionnaires in the entrance to the home. The manager said visitors rarely completed the questionnaires. There had not been any complaints received since the last inspection. Residents spoken to said they had no complaints but if they did they would talk to the manager or a member of staff. The manager said only a small number of residents families visited the home and he made a point of chatting to those who did visit to seek their views. There was no documentary evidence of their views. The home held regular meetings with the residents, where issues such as food, trips were discussed and if people were happy with the service received. Residents confirmed they attended meetings. There was evidence in staff files seen of training in the protection of vulnerable adults, and staff were aware of the home’s policies and procedures. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19,20,21,23,24,25,26. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home provided a safe, pleasant, odour free environment for residents to live in. EVIDENCE: During the past two years there have been a number of improvements to the home and there were plans to build an extension to the rear of the home, to provide another 6 bedrooms and another lounge. This will provide the opportunity to move the smoking lounge making it more pleasant for nonsmokers. Accommodation was provided over three floors in a large detached house. The main kitchen, office, staff rooms, laundry facilities, and storage facilities were located in the basement of the house. On the ground floor there were two lounges, one for people who smoke, a dining room, small kitchen, toilets, shower room, bathrooms and bedrooms. Further bedrooms, bathrooms and Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 toilets were located on the second and third floors. A lift provided access to the upper floors. A large number of residents smoked, and the smoking lounge was well used. Ventilation was fairly efficient. The manager said there were ongoing problems with burns to carpets and furniture, which the home had to frequently replace. The home had recently changed flooring in the dining area / lounge with a hardwearing vinyl, which looked attractive. The lounges were comfortable, with TVs in both lounges. At the time of the inspection no residents required any specialist equipment, such as hoists in bathrooms. There was work in progress installing a ‘wet room’ on the upper floor, to provide additional bathing facilities. The home employed a maintenance man, four days per week, who was responsible for carrying out regular equipment checks as well as general maintenance duties. The home had a certificate file for water/ temperatures, lift maintenance, fire equipment, alarms and drills, and all certificates appeared to be in order. The local fire officer carried out fire drills with staff, including night staff. The main kitchen was located in the basement and appeared to be well equipped. Meals were sent from the main kitchen already plated, to the dining room. Dirty dishes were rinsed in the small kitchen adjacent to the dining room, before being returned to the main kitchen. The menu was on display and the chef had a daily menu choice to note residents’ preferences. Fridges and freezers had checklists prominently displayed and they all appeared to be up to date. All food stocks were clearly marked with purchase dates to enable the chef to rotate stocks. There was evidence in individual bedrooms seen of personal possessions and residents were encouraged to look after their own rooms. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27,28,29,30. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home employed sufficient numbers of appropriately qualified and experienced staff to meet the needs of residents. EVIDENCE: There were sufficient numbers of qualified and experienced staff to meet residents’ needs. Qualified staff covered all shifts, supported by three carers on day shifts and one carer at night. Four staff files seen contained application forms, references, CRB certificate details, and induction records. Supervision notes and training certificates were kept in separate files. The home had copies of old copies of CRB certificates and the manager was advised these should be destroyed, once their details had been noted and retained. The RNHA (Registered Nursing Home Association) currently arranged CRB checks and they provided letters with relevant details of CRB certificates, which were held in staff files. There were CRB disclosures details on each file seen. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The home had purchased an induction pack and training records from Mulberry House, which had been introduced for new starters. Both were comprehensive and covered all key policies and procedures. Training needs were identified during induction and supervision. There was evidence of NVQ and mental health training courses displayed on the office wall, and training certificates were held in a file in the main office. The manager was advised to keep certificates in individual staff files, to make it easier to keep track of which staff had attended training. Training received included, protection of vulnerable adults, insight into mental health, health and safety, fire training, and NVQ courses. Most staff had undertaken NVQ II, 4 were currently doing NVQ III and another 3 were currently doing NVQII. Two staff had recently undertaken a ‘fire marshal’ training course. The manager provided supervision to all staff, although he was introducing a new system where qualified nurses will provide supervision to care staff, every 6 – 8 weeks for full time staff, and on an ad hoc basis for part time staff. The home held monthly staff meetings. Policies and procedure manuals were available in the main office, and staff spoken to indicated they knew where they were kept and their contents. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38. Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home was run in the best interest of residents with policies and procedures in place to protect residents. EVIDENCE: The manager held regular resident meetings to seek their views and residents spoken to confirmed they had attended meetings and discussed things such as the menu, quality of food, and day trips. There were no formal user or carer surveys although the manager spoke informally to relatives who visited the home. Copies of the complaints policy and questionnaires were located in the entrance to the home. Most residents were referred by Manchester City Council (MCC), Salford, Tameside, and Bury and funded through spot purchase arrangements, with Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 fees ranging from £412 to £898.91. A petty cash float of around £300 is available to cover additional costs such as taxis, and extra food. Fees covered meals, toiletries, laundry services, and furniture. Residents could bring in or buy their own furniture. The fees did not cover costs associated with hairdressing, chiropody or buying clothes. Some residents received a personal allowance from Manchester City Council MCC Town Hall, for others benefits were received directly by the home. Only a couple of residents looked after their own finances. Residents’ monies were kept in a cash box, which was kept in the main office when the administrator was on duty and in a separate locked cabinet when she was not on duty – accessible only to the manager. The home used internet banking and each resident had an individual sheet detailing monies in and out of their accounts. Residents signed for all withdrawals. The home draws as an amount of money per week out of the residents’ accounts, which covered the costs of cigarettes, clothes, and spending money. All financial transactions were recorded, with numbered receipts attached to individual sheets. Receipts were not always available, for example, where a resident went out to the pub or local shops as they were in control of their own money. Residents monies were not always received on time from MCC and the home used the petty cash float to provide them with funds, where this was the case. The manager was advised to discuss this with residents’ appointees at the town hall to ensure they received their allowances at the appropriate time. The administrator was responsible for undertaking daily reconciliations and the home had an annual audit. The manager was advised that he should also carry out regular reconciliations, as a second check to ensure all monies and records were in order. All records and accounts seen appeared correct. Contract monitoring was usually carried out by individual social workers, responsible for the placements, particularly in the first year. The Manchester Review Team also undertook annual reviews. There was a low turnover of residents and vacancies usually only occurred following the death of a resident or where residents decide to leave for more independent settings. Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 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 Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 3 3 3 3 3 N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 3 11 3 DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 2 17 3 18 3 3 3 3 N/A 3 3 3 2 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 3 28 3 29 3 30 3 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 3 2 3 3 2 2 3 3 Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 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. 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. 1. 2. Refer to Standard OP35 OP33 Good Practice Recommendations The manager should discuss with residents’ appointees at MCC the timely payment of their allowances. The registered person must ensure that a quality assurance system is in place that allows for the recording of consultations of the residents and their representatives. The manager must ensure a second reconciliation of financial records to ensure all records and monies are in order. 3. OP35 Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection North West Regional Office 11th Floor West Point 501 Chester Road Old Trafford M16 9HU 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 Grove Park Nursing Home DS0000021644.V330690.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 - 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!