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Please note that the information on this website is now out of date.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 14/02/06 for Park House

Also see our care home review for Park House for more information

This inspection was carried out on 14th February 2006.

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.

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

Service users benefited from excellent care planning. They lived their lives to the full. Activities were varied and service users said these were personal to them. They had the opportunity to make decisions about their lives. Staff were trained to assess how much supervision people needed in any given situation. Helping people unable to communicate their needs was also managed very well. Service users views on daily living were `everyone can make a choice, people who are disabled will show their choice`. Service users said staff helped them and took into account their wishes such as when to go to bed and getting up. They learned new skills. Relatives were kept informed of progress service users made and were invited to take part in care reviews if service users wished. Relatives were made very welcome and praised staff for their professionalism in care. They were also invited to social events at the home. Service users enjoyed going out and going on holidays. They chose where they went. Relatives were equally impressed with how social activities were organised. The high standard of service users healthcare plan enabled them to receive the correct support from medical professionals. Care staff had clear guidance in what each person needed. Service users benefited from having their own policies and procedures. They also had information on their rights. They received guidance in how to keep safe and had their own house rules to follow. Service users took part in recruiting staff. Sufficient staff were employed who were supervised in their work. Teamwork was noticeable and staff said they enjoyed their work and chosen career. Service users said the carers treated them well. They felt `safe.` Relatives comments included `everyone is friendly`, `the care is excellent `.Staff were trained in caring for people with a learning disability, and given other training as part of their professional development. This included important topics such as abuse of vulnerable adults, health and safety and principles of care and care planning. Service users involvement in training staff was excellent and covered all aspects of care needs from their view, such as `the right to shop for their own food, the right to pay for their care, the right to clean their own bedroom` and the important principle of `staff are not in charge, we are working together.` The home was very well managed and run in the interests of the service users. They had their say in how the home was managed. What they said mattered. The views of relatives and other visitors to the home were sought. The results of all surveys carried out were made public to interested people. The home was very nicely decorated. Furniture provided for service users was of a good quality. Service users liked their home. There was plenty of space and the overall standard of hygiene was excellent.

What has improved since the last inspection?

There were no standards identified in the previous inspection as not met.

What the care home could do better:

There were no identified areas that could be improved on. The home meets all standards assessed in this and the previous inspection and were commended in some.

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Park House 73 Todmorden Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 3ES Lead Inspector Mrs Marie Dickinson Unannounced Inspection 14th February 2006 12:30a Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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 Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Park House Address 73 Todmorden Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 3ES 01282 436471 01284 414997 parkhouses@btclick.com 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 Joseph Serge Zephir Care Home 13 Category(ies) of Learning disability (13) registration, with number of places Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 10th October 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Park House is a large spacious property situated in a residential area of Burnley. It has enclosed garden areas and parking to the rear of the building. It is within a short walking distance to Burnley town centre. The home is owned by Mr and Mrs Zephir and managed by Sandra England. Park House accommodates service users with severe to moderate learning disabilities. Accommodation is in eleven single and one double bedroom, three of which are en suite rooms. The home is managed in two units both with lounge, dining and kitchen facilities. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection was unannounced and took place on 14th February 2006. It is the second statutory inspection carried out this year. During the inspection, time was spent talking to the people who live at the home and staff on duty. Information was obtained from staff records, care records and policies and procedures. The home was assessed against the National Minimum Standards for Younger Adults. Not all standards were assessed and this report should be read with the inspection report dated 10th & 19th September 2005 for the reader to have a complete overview of the home. What the service does well: Service users benefited from excellent care planning. They lived their lives to the full. Activities were varied and service users said these were personal to them. They had the opportunity to make decisions about their lives. Staff were trained to assess how much supervision people needed in any given situation. Helping people unable to communicate their needs was also managed very well. Service users views on daily living were ‘everyone can make a choice, people who are disabled will show their choice’. Service users said staff helped them and took into account their wishes such as when to go to bed and getting up. They learned new skills. Relatives were kept informed of progress service users made and were invited to take part in care reviews if service users wished. Relatives were made very welcome and praised staff for their professionalism in care. They were also invited to social events at the home. Service users enjoyed going out and going on holidays. They chose where they went. Relatives were equally impressed with how social activities were organised. The high standard of service users healthcare plan enabled them to receive the correct support from medical professionals. Care staff had clear guidance in what each person needed. Service users benefited from having their own policies and procedures. They also had information on their rights. They received guidance in how to keep safe and had their own house rules to follow. Service users took part in recruiting staff. Sufficient staff were employed who were supervised in their work. Teamwork was noticeable and staff said they enjoyed their work and chosen career. Service users said the carers treated Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 them well. They felt ‘safe.’ Relatives comments included ‘everyone is friendly’, ‘the care is excellent ‘.Staff were trained in caring for people with a learning disability, and given other training as part of their professional development. This included important topics such as abuse of vulnerable adults, health and safety and principles of care and care planning. Service users involvement in training staff was excellent and covered all aspects of care needs from their view, such as ‘the right to shop for their own food, the right to pay for their care, the right to clean their own bedroom’ and the important principle of ‘staff are not in charge, we are working together.’ The home was very well managed and run in the interests of the service users. They had their say in how the home was managed. What they said mattered. The views of relatives and other visitors to the home were sought. The results of all surveys carried out were made public to interested people. The home was very nicely decorated. Furniture provided for service users was of a good quality. Service users liked their home. There was plenty of space and the overall standard of hygiene was excellent. 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. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): These standards were not assessed during this inspection. EVIDENCE: There had been no admissions to the home since the last inspection. All standards were assessed as being met at the last inspection. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7,8,9,10 Service users benefited from good assessments that looked at all their needs. Being involved in writing their own care plans meant they could have personal aims that staff knew about and helped them achieve safely. Service users policies and procedures and their attendance at staff and management meetings, helped them be involved in aspects of life in the home. The confidentiality policy informed them of how their records were always kept private. EVIDENCE: Service users discussed their care plans. They said how they wanted staff to help them. The standard of residents’ care records was very good, and included an up to date assessment of needs. There were clear directions for staff as to the type and amount of support each service user needed. Specialist help required for service users was recorded and the support provided. Information was recorded to keep people safe. Staff had clear guidance on how to manage risk taking by service users. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 Service users benefited from being involved in writing their own care plans. They had meetings with staff to discuss what they would like to achieve and set goals to reach. Service users had a member of staff referred to as a key worker to help them with special activities such as keeping in contact with their family and personal care. This was extra to staff helping everyone each day. Service users in the home knew which carer was their key worker. They said they ‘liked their carer’. They confirmed their carer took them to hospital appointments, holidays and shopping. Service users with limited communication skills were given the same opportunities to be cared for as they wished. Their preferred routines, likes and dislikes had additional information that helped staff to know what to do, for example, ‘I need staff to hold my arm when I am outside’, ‘I don’t like water on my face’. The service users looked after their own money with the help of staff. This was recorded in their files. Care plans were reviewed regularly showing progress made and changes needed in either meeting needs or achieving goals. Service user goals were easy to follow. They showed who had a particular responsibility to help reach the desired outcome. Care plans were written for service users understanding. Being illustrated helped people follow ‘to do’ lists that had been agreed. Service users had discussions about their care with their carer and other people who would help them, and had a copy of their care plan to follow. Staff induction training given by service users included ‘new people should ask the person themselves or people who know them well and not just guess what is right.’ Service users said that they were involved in staff and management meetings. They took turns on behalf of everyone to say what they wanted. They also had their own policies and procedures and ‘house rules’ they had agreed on. During the inspection it was clear staff considered confidentiality of service users information and records to be important. These records were kept secure. Confidentiality was included in training given to staff and written in the staff handbook. Service users understood what keeping records private meant. They were confident that information about them was handled correctly. They also had information on confidentiality given to them in their own policy book. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 11,12,13,14,15,16,17 Service users living in the home were given opportunities to live a fulfilling and valued lifestyle at the home and in the wider community. This included social activities and learning new skills for personal development. Service users were helped to keep in touch with their families and friends. Relatives and friends who visited were made welcome. Service users were provided with a nutritious and varied diet. EVIDENCE: Several service users were at home during the inspection. They said they usually did something different every day. They had weekly planners they used to help them remember what to do and where to go. For example when they cooked a meal, cleaned their bedroom, had a bath and what day they went to College. Staff helped them where needed and the planner they used was easy to follow. Induction training of new staff by service users included basic principles of care. Service users providing the training tell staff for example ‘I choose to go to town, my own friends, my clothes, my food. If someone has difficulty choosing, can staff help and have any ideas?’ Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 Personal development was shown in records for each service user. One service user was planning to move to independent living. He was having meetings with the manager and social worker to plan how this would be achieved. Service users views about their opportunities to take part in activities were positive. They said they pleased themselves what activity they joined in. Some service users went to College. They learned different skills such as writing, numbers and computer skills. They had records of achievement awarded by the College. Discussion with service users showed how they made full use of community facilities. They went to town regularly. They had enjoyed Christmas and one service user said she had been to York with her carer Christmas shopping. They had outings, holidays and went to concerts. Service users discussed a holiday they were planning. Comments written in service user evaluations of the service included, ‘I am able to choose leisure activities and holidays, I liked the Isle of White’. Some service users had joined a mobility scheme in the home, which meant staff would drive them to various places Visitors to the home were made welcome. The visiting policy enabled service users to have visitors at any time and allowed for service users to refuse to see visitors if they wished. One comment written said ‘I can talk to my friends and relatives in private’. Service users relationship with their families was detailed in their plan of care and regular contact was encouraged. Service users were able to invite their relatives to social events at the home. During the course of the inspection, staff working in the home treated service users with respect. One service user who gives induction training to new staff said she always tells people, ‘I will respect you if you will respect me.’ All service users can comment this when they complete a questionnaire for the management about staff in the home. Service users had their preferred name stated on their plan. They had locks on their doors and managed their own keys. They said they spent time in their bedroom when they wanted and had agreed flexible times for going to bed. They had their own house rules they also agreed on. Service users said the food was good. They planned their own menus, went shopping and took turns to cook. Staff helped them. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19,20 Recording individual preferred routines likes and dislikes allowed service users to be cared for in a way that suited them. Service users personal care was given in a manner that respected their privacy and dignity. The healthcare of service users was monitored. The care plan each person had helped them be understood. EVIDENCE: Service users said they liked their carer and were happy with how they helped them. This included staff helping with personal care. Records showed how service users needs were outlined and the help they required detailed for staff to follow. Service users confirmed staff spoke to other professional people about their care. This included healthcare and part of the staff role was to help them attend medical appointments. Routine health care was evidenced in records. The healthcare plan was written for the service user to understand. All service users were registered with a General Practitioner. Regular reviewing of healthcare looked at each area for well being separately and showed the action to be taken and who will help. The records also included information about Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 service users medication, and what staff should be aware of if someone was not well and couldn’t express this. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22,23 Service users felt their interests were protected. They were confident complaints would be dealt with properly. By alerting service users of what abuse can include, they were able to speak up if they were in a difficult situation. Good practice in employment, safe guarded resident’s financial interests. EVIDENCE: Service users in the home were aware they had the right to make a complaint should the need occur. They discussed this and commented they ‘knew who to speak to if they were unhappy about their care’. The procedure they had made it easy for them to follow, and it was written and illustrated in a way to show them their complaints would be taken seriously. Service users said they were confidant people would listen to them. Written comments included, ‘I am able to discuss anything with the carers and management, and ‘I am aware of the complaints procedure’. Abuse procedures had been discussed with staff and were part of their training. Service users were given written and illustrated information to help protect themselves from abuse. Staff had also signed a declaration as a condition of their employment excluding them from any financial gain from residents. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24,30 Service users lived in a comfortable homely environment, which they said they liked. The home was furnished and decorated to a high standard. Maintenance was very good and standards of hygiene were high. EVIDENCE: Park House is a large spacious house situated near to the town centre of Burnley. The home is managed in two units. Both have lounges and dining rooms and kitchen. The laundry room is in the basement. The home was decorated to a very good standard and furnishings and fittings were ‘homelike’ in style and of a good quality. Service users said they liked their home ‘everything is nice’. There is a garden area to the front and back. The back garden is protected with a security gate. Secure car parking is also to the rear of the property. The home was very well maintained, with continuing investment made to keep high living standards for service users. The overall standard of hygiene in the home was very high. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,32,34,35,36 The level of staffing was good. Good staff recruitment procedures were followed Service users had confidence in the staff working at the home and benefited from staff they helped to recruit and liked. Training provided and attended by staff was good which helped them to develop proper skills in caring. Service users were involved in staff training. Staff received regular supervision. EVIDENCE: The number of staff employed was linked to the needs of the service users currently living at the home. The service users were very happy with the staff in the home. They took turns to be part of the interview panel to help choose new staff. They knew what questions to ask people. They were also consulted on the decision to employ someone, by filling in a questionnaire after the interview. All the service users were introduced to new staff before they started work. Some new staff had been appointed since the last inspection. Staff files showed recruitment checks to be complete. Satisfactory references and Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) and Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) register check had been applied for, prior to employment. Staff had a job Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 description to work to that outlined their responsibilities of care duties. They were also given a contract of employment. Comments about staff were very good. They were described as ‘friendly’. One written comment from a relative stated ‘ I have seen a few different staff and they are all friendly’. Service users said there was always enough staff on duty’. Staff interviewed had good knowledge of their role and responsibility as carer. All staff had attended basic training. A record of this training was kept. Staff said they enjoyed training and were helped to develop their career in care. They received supervision regularly. Service users helped to train new staff. The planning and methods used for this purpose was excellent. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,38,39 Service users, relatives and staff were happy with the way the home was managed. The running of the home was well organised, and everyone had an opportunity to say what they wanted to improve services. Guidance and support was given to staff, which helped towards service users quality of life experience in the home being good. EVIDENCE: Mr and Mrs Zephir own the home, and take an active role in day-to-day management. Since the last inspection a new manager has been appointed and was registered with the Commission. The manager Sandra England has many years experience in managing residential care and holds relevant qualifications for this position. Service users are given opportunities to tell the manager and staff how they would like the home to run, the care they receive and facilities they enjoy. Service users are consulted regularly about their care, the staff and the Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 facilities they are provided with. They are involved in staff and management meetings. A representative from the service users attend meetings to put forward ideas and their views of how the home should be run. To do this staff and service users put their ideas for better care and working practice on the agenda and put them forward during meetings. Everyone then discusses how these ideas can work to the benefit of everyone. Service users said their views were listened to. Another method used was with anonymous questionnaires. These were given to service users and other people such as relatives. The views of those who completed these regarding the care and facilities are published and made available for people to look at. One comment on a letter stated ‘ excellent care at Park House’, and ‘highly satisfied’. Other professional people describe the team at Park House as ‘professional and caring’, and ‘the service promotes independence’ Staff also had the opportunity to discuss work issues with the owners and manager on a day-to-day basis and in supervision. Service users take part in staff supervision. What they say is also considered very important to help staff to work as professionals. This was recorded in easy to use picture illustrated forms, designed for everyone to understand. Staff said they had support with training. Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score X X X X X Standard No 22 23 Score 3 4 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 4 4 4 4 3 Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 X X X X X 3 LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 3 12 3 13 3 14 3 15 3 16 3 17 Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 Score 3 3 X 4 3 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Park House Score 4 3 3 X Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 4 4 4 X X X X DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 22 NO 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. Refer to Standard Good Practice Recommendations Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection East Lancashire Area Office 1st Floor, Unit 4 Petre Road Clayton Business Park Accrington BB5 5JB 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 Park House DS0000009476.V272371.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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!