Inspection on 01/06/07 for Hopwood Court

This inspection was carried out on 1st June 2007.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Excellent. 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

Hopwood Court 14/10/09

Hopwood Court 18/12/05

Hopwood Court 15/04/05

Hopwood Court 12/01/05

Hopwood Court 10/05/04

Similar services:

Maple Lodge

Heathlands

Aston Court Nursing Home

Breme

Ravenhurst

Bank House

Inspirations

Westmead

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Hopwood Court Birmingham Road Hopwood Alvechurch Worcestershire B48 7AQ Lead Inspector Yvonne South Key Unannounced Inspection 08:30 1st June 2007 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 Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.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. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Hopwood Court Address Birmingham Road Hopwood Alvechurch Worcestershire B48 7AQ 0121 445 4743 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) Mr John William Roach Mrs Carole Roach Michelle Birchill Care Home 23 Category(ies) of Dementia - over 65 years of age (23), Old age, registration, with number not falling within any other category (23), of places Physical disability over 65 years of age (23) Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 18.12.05 Brief Description of the Service: Hopwood Court provides personal care for up to 23 older people who may have a physical disability and/or a dementia illness. The home is situated in its own grounds off the main Birmingham Road and affords countryside views on all sides. It is approximately a mile and a half from Alvechurch village and there is a local public house. The home is on two floors and access to the first floor is by stair lift. Handrails are fitted throughout and adapted bathing and toilet facilities are available. Accommodation is provided in three double rooms and seventeen single rooms, seven of which are ensuite. There are communal bathrooms with toilets on each floor and six separate toilets. There are also communal lounges and dining areas. The home is owned by John William Roach and Carol Roach and the registered manager is their daughter Michelle Birchill On 01.06.07 the manager quoted the fees as being between £360 and £420 per week. Additional charges are made for hairdressing, chiropody, magazines and newspapers, toiletries, dental treatment, and dry cleaning. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This was a key inspection that incorporated information received by the Commission for Social Care Inspection since the previous key inspection, which took place on 18.12.05, and the information obtained during fieldwork on 01.06.07. The fieldwork took place over nine and three quarter hours, during which the inspector spoke to two residents, four staff, five relatives, a visiting activities therapist and a district nurse. Documents were assessed and a partial tour of the premises was also undertaken. The registered manager and deputy gave assistance. Prior to the fieldwork the home was asked by the CSCI to complete and return a pre-inspection questionnaire and to distribute questionnaires to the residents and health care professionals seeking their opinions of the service. To date seven responses have been received from residents and five from relatives. The focus of this inspection was on the key National Minimum Standards and requirements that arose out of the previous inspection. What the service does well: The home is well situated in attractive grounds and provides a comfortable, clean home in which to live. Relatives and residents compliment the staff on the high standard of housekeeping particularly that there are ‘no smells. People say that when seeking a home Hopwood made a very good impression. They were welcomed and informed. One person said; ‘I visit many nursing and residential homes and hold Hopwood Court in high regard. The staff are always very helpful and attentive and they have a lovely rapport with the residents, helping them to cope with treatments when they are anxious or confused. The relatives value the good communication between the home and themselves and the residents appreciate the wide range of activities and events that they and their relatives can participate in. A resident said; ‘There is always something to do’. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 The menu offers a good choice of nutritional meals, which the residents describe as ‘excellent’. Personal and health care is well provided and the home works well with health care professionals. A district nurse said that communication was very good and information and assistance was always available. What has improved since the last inspection? 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. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.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 Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 3 (An intermediate service is not provided by this service. Therefore standard 6 was not assessed.) Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People receive the information and support they need to help them make a decision regarding admission for care in the home. A place is only offered if a pre admission assessment indicates that the home can provide the care that is needed. EVIDENCE: It was observed that the Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide were readily available and the manager confirmed that each new resident received their own copy of the Service Users’ Guide. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Residents confirmed in the questionnaires they completed, and verbally, that they had received the information and support that they needed to make a decision regarding admission to the home. This was endorsed by the relatives. The inspector assessed the care of three residents. Their documents demonstrated that they had been assessed by someone from the home prior to a place in the home being offered. There was good clear, informative information regarding their needs and abilities on which to base a decision and agree an initial care plan with the prospective resident. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7, 8, 9, 10 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The information and guidance is available for staff so that residents receive the personal and health care they need. Medication is well managed so people receive their prescribed medication safely and staff respect residents’ privacy and dignity. EVIDENCE: The documents that were assessed contained good care plans, risk assessments and reviews that provided information and guidance for staff. Some of these would benefit from containing more detail. Some files would have benefited from ‘thinning out’ so that current information was separated from historical documents. This would make it easier to locate and maintain the information and records. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 It was recommended that; • residents, and/or with their consent their representatives, were more involved in the care planning process, • a plan relating to challenging behaviour be developed further and • a care plan for food and diet for a resident with diabetes be drawn up. The records indicated that the home had good professional working relationships with health care professionals and this was supported by a district nurse who said that staff were approachable and communication was good. Recommendations were carried out and assistance was always available. Residents confirmed in the questionnaires that they received the help and medical care they needed. One person said that she was well looked after and another person commented that the care staff were always thorough and attentive to medical needs. Relatives supported this view and said that communication between them and the home was very good. The manager said that there were policies and procedure available for the management of medication and monthly audits were undertaken. Stock was acceptable although the deputy said that at times it was difficult to get the correct amount on prescriptions so that the supply fitted in with the modular dosage system in use. Storage was clean tidy and acceptable. Security was good with the exception of the medication fridge. This was not lockable. It was recommended that a lock be fitted or a lockable fridge be purchased. The Commission for Social Care Inspection received a phone call on 06.06.07 confirming that a lock had been fitted. The keys for medication storage were always held on the person responsible for them. Medication Administration Sheets were well maintained. It was suggested that when residents self-administered any of their medication the transfer of stock from the care of the home to the resident should be recorded so that an audit trail was maintained. Privacy and dignity was respected and it was observed that residents were treated kindly and courteously. Staff knocked on doors and waited for an answer before entering. Mail was delivered to the addressee unopened and phone calls could be made and received in private. Communal bathrooms and toilets were fitted with locks that could be overridden in an emergency. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 The bedroom doors were not fitted with suitable locks. A requirement had been made following the last inspection that ‘a means by which residents can lock their bedroom doors must be provided to those residents who request it’ and where a resident may choose to lock their bedroom door a risk assessment must be carried out to ensure that staff can gain access in an emergency’. Risk assessments had been carried out and one lock had been fitted. The manager sought confirmation the lock was of the correct type and met the criteria agreed with the Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority before proceeding. It did not. The inspector undertook to send a copy of the criteria to the manager and invited the manager to visit the CSCI office and see the sample locks kept there. This was agreed. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12, 13, 14, 15 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Residents have opportunities to participate in individual and group activities that interest and stimulate them. They are supported to keep in touch with relatives and friends and their visitors are made welcome. Religious beliefs are respected and residents are supported. Residents enjoy a varied and nutritional diet. EVIDENCE: The pre-inspection questionnaire indicated that the home provided a weekly activities programme, there were outings to garden centres, local pubs, to Bideford, entertainers visited and special events and birthdays were celebrated. In the afternoon of the field work the ‘Friday Lady’ came. She entertained the residents with quizzes and memory games. In addition she undertook a wide range of other activities such as relaxation exercises, co-ordination games with balls and hoops, memory and word games. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 Records were maintained for each resident of their participation. Residents and relatives confirmed that they enjoyed these events and were welcome to join in. A relative said in the questionnaire; ‘Residents look alert and there is always a programme of activities. Relatives are invited to celebrations at Christmas and Easter which I enjoy attending with my relative’. Residents confirmed verbally and in the questionnaire responses that there were activities arranged every day for those who wished to participate. The manager confirmed that a vicar called fortnightly and visited everyone. A short service was also held for those who wished to attend. Current residents belonged to three Christian faith denominations and other religious leaders could be contacted and asked to visit as required. A relative confirmed that some residents went out to church. Visitors were welcome in the house. The inspector spoke to four relatives who commended the home on the standard of care provided, the welcome they received and their involvement. Residents said in the questionnaires that food was; ‘Very good and good portions.’ ‘An alternative is always available.’ ‘There is always a variety’. This was confirmed by the relatives and the sample menus seen demonstrated that a varied and nutritious menu was offered. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 16, 18 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. People have the information they need to guide them if they wish to raise concerns and they are confident that they will be listened to. Staff are well recruited and trained so that residents are protected. EVIDENCE: Copies of the complaints procedure were in the Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide. No concerns, complaints or allegation had been received by the CSCI since the last inspection and the pre-inspection questionnaire indicated that the home had received no complaints either. The residents’ questionnaires stated that they knew how to raise any concerns they might have and who to speak to. One resident said she knew what to do; ‘but she has never had anything to complain about’. Staff were clear regarding the action they should take if they received a complaint. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 The pre-inspection questionnaire indicated that when staff were recruited checks were undertaken by the Criminal Records Bureau and of the Protection of Vulnerable Adults list before anyone started unsupervised personal care work. The staffs’ records indicated that they had been interviewed and references had been taken up. They had received induction training and had had training to identify possible abuse of vulnerable people and how to respond to concerns. This knowledge was confirmed during interviews with the inspector. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 19, 26 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The residents are able to live in a clean well maintained home that suits their needs and wishes. Due attention is paid to the risks of cross infection so that the residents health is safeguarded. EVIDENCE: A partial tour of the home was undertaken. It was observed that everywhere was clean, tidy, well maintained and decorated. Residents’ bedrooms were personalised with their belonging and were pleasant and comfortable. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 The manager said that some of the furniture in two of the rooms was scheduled for replacement. On 06.06.07 the Commission for Social Care Inspection received a phone call confirming that this had been done. The dining room tables were attractively laid with fresh flower arrangements on each and the lounge appeared comfortable and well used for activities and daily living by the residents. The pre-inspection questionnaire stated that the there had been no change to the use of rooms since the last inspection and re-decoration was continuously in progress. Residents said in the questionnaire responses that; • ‘The home is lovely. I love my room.’ • ‘Always fresh and clean.’ • ‘It’s kept very nice.’ Relatives supported this view when speaking to the inspector. They appreciated the fact that there was ‘no smell’. It was ‘beautiful well kept and immaculate’. The manager said that she undertook a monthly audit of the premises to ensure a good standard was maintained. It was observed that the laundry was well organised and equipped, clean and tidy. Liquid soap, disposable towels and personal protective equipment was readily available throughout the home and the home had a contract for the removal of clinical waste. Training for staff had been provided in infection control. Staff, their records and the pre-inspection questionnaire supported this. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 27 – 30 are: 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users’ needs are met by the numbers and skill mix of staff. Service users are in safe hands at all times. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Staff are trained and competent to do their jobs. The Commission consider all the above are key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27, 28, 29, 30 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Sufficient staff are well recruited and trained so that residents receive a good quality of care and protection. EVIDENCE: The pre-inspection questionnaire stated that there were 19 care staff and 3 ancillary staff employed in the home. Staffing levels were maintained within the team so that residents received consistency of care. No agency staff had been used since the last inspection. The staff team was stable with only one loss to the staff team through illness in the past year. The team ranged in age between 21 years and 70 years. All were white British and female. There were no known needs associated with religion and sexuality that needed to be addressed by the service. Staff who spoke to the inspector considered that the staffing levels were able to meet the current needs of the residents without difficulty. The pre-inspection questionnaire stated that 13 staff had National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ) to level 2 or above. This equated to 68 , which is above the 50 requirement of the National Minimum Standards. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Further qualifications had been achieved and during the field work the inspector was informed that 14 staff now had NVQ to level 2, 2 staff had NVQ to level 3 and four more staff were on courses. In addition two staff were undertaking the NVQ Assessors course. The pre-inspection questionnaire, staff and their records indicated that the home was strongly committed to training and the standards of care demonstrated the benefits of a well-trained team. The records of three staff were checked and the staff were interviewed by the inspector. The staff records and the staff confirmed that each person had undertaken an acceptable recruitment process and the required checks and references had been undertaken. The records were in good order and well maintained. Relatives said in the questionnaire responses that staff were very good, pleasant and helpful. One person said; ‘I am very satisfied with the overall care. The staff are always helpful, attentive and sensitive to my relative’s needs and my own. I particularly like the fact that the staff team is stable. I get to know the staff and they know my relative’. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 Management and Administration The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 38 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. Service users live in a home which is run and managed by a person who is fit to be in charge, of good character and able to discharge his or her responsibilities fully. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. The home is run in the best interests of service users. Service users are safeguarded by the accounting and financial procedures of the home. Service users’ financial interests are safeguarded. Staff are appropriately supervised. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping, policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users and staff are promoted and protected. The Commission considers Standards 31, 33, 35 and 38 the key standards to be inspected. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 35, 38 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. The home is well-managed and sound systems and structures are in place to support the staff in the delivery of care and maintain health and safety. Therefore residents are safe and well cared for. EVIDENCE: The manager was experienced and well qualified to undertake her duties, and she was well supported by the registered providers and staff team. Policies and procedures were in place and the pre-inspection questionnaire indicated that they had been reviewed. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 A requirement was made following the last inspection that a formal quality assurance system must be put in place. Progress had been made to achieve this. The manager said that she intended using a comprehensive audit/planning and analysis system in conjunction with the Commission for Social Care Inspection’s Annual Quality Assurance Assessment (AQAA), which has just been made available. A survey had been undertaken with residents and representatives and an analysis of the returned questionnaires had been placed in the Statement of Purpose and Service Users’ Guide to demonstrate their views of the service. Residents and staff meetings were regularly held and the views of the groups and the individuals were valued. The manager said that a small amount of personal money was held in safe keeping for the majority of the residents at their request. Individuals tended to use this money mainly to settle the costs of hairdressing and chiropody. Records were maintained and receipts were available for all income and expenditure. The pre-inspection questionnaire indicated that services and equipment were well maintained and monitored. The health and safety manuals indicated that appropriate risk assessments had been undertaken and risks were well managed through action, good maintenance and monitoring. A fire safety risk assessment had been undertaken and the fire log demonstrated that the fire detection and protection systems were regularly checked. Staff records indicated that appropriate training and participation in fire drills was undertaken and the staff who spoke to the inspector confirmed that they knew what action they should take in an emergency. A report indicated that a recent inspection by the Environmental Health Service had found no issues or actions that needed attention. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Older People have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 2 3 4 5 6 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 X X 4 X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 3 8 4 9 3 10 3 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 4 13 4 14 4 15 4 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 4 17 X 18 4 4 X X X X X X 4 STAFFING Standard No Score 27 4 28 4 29 4 30 4 MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 4 4 3 X 3 X X 4 Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1 Refer to Standard OP10 Good Practice Recommendations Residents’ bedroom doors should be fitted with locks that meet the criteria agreed by the Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority. These enable staff access in an emergency and prevent any risk to residents of entrapment, thus providing them with privacy and protection of their property whenever they wish. Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Worcester Local Office Commission for Social Care Inspection The Coach House John Comyn Drive Perdiswell Park, Droitwich Road Worcester WR3 7NW 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 Hopwood Court DS0000018508.V332692.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - 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!