Inspection on 19/10/05 for Parkside

This inspection was carried out on 19th October 2005.

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

Parkside 25/05/07

Parkside 24/02/06

Parkside 10/02/05

Parkside 21/07/04

Parkside 02/03/04

Similar services:

Clover House

Park Lodge

Mere Hall View

St Bonaventures

Hudson Road

Whitewalls

Home Farm

Griffin Lodge

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

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Parkside 18 Outwood Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 3EH Lead Inspector Mrs Marie Dickinson Unannounced Inspection 19th October 2005 02:00 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.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 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.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. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Parkside Address 18 Outwood Road Burnley Lancashire BB11 3EH 01282 838601 01282 414979 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 Mrs Linda Joyce Zephir Mrs Sarah Casey Care Home 5 Category(ies) of Learning disability (5) registration, with number of places Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. The care home must at all times, employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager, who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. The home is registered to accommodate 5 adults with a learning disability. 10th February 2005 2. Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Parkside is a terraced property located near to Burnley town centre. It is owned by Mr and Mrs Zephir and managed by Sarah Casey the registered manager. Five service users live at the home. They have their own bedroom and share a lounge/dining room, bathroom, toilets, dining/kitchen and laundry. The service users manage the home with the help of trained staff. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.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. The Inspector looked at written information and records relating to service users and staff. One person who lived at the home was asked for their views about the home and how it was managed. How care was actually provided was discussed. Consideration was also given in methods used by the owner’s, manager and staff employed, to get service users and relatives views on the care provided and the home they lived in. To help carry out this inspection comment cards were sent to the service users, their relatives and visitors. These were returned and used to get information about service users life at the home. The manager also filled in a form for the inspection showing how the home was managed and kept safe for both service users and staff. What the service does well: The home is ideal for the service users as it provides a comfortable easy to manage living environment. Service users said ‘they liked living there’ and ‘felt safe’. Service users understood their contract and what it meant. The type of care planning used was very good which benefited service users. They lived their lives to the full and enjoyed various activities personal to them. They had the opportunity to make decisions about their lives. Although staff helped them, they had control over the management of their care and their home. Relatives were ‘very happy’ and kept informed of progress service users made. They were invited to take part in care reviews if service users wished. Relatives said they were made very welcome and kept in touch with what was going on. They were also invited to social events at the home. Service users enjoyed their lives such as going to going out socially and going on holidays. They chose where they went. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 The high standard of residents healthcare plan enabled them to receive the correct support from medical professionals. Care staff had clear guidance in what each person needed. Service users had good information given to them on how to protect themselves. Service users took part in recruiting staff. Sufficient staff were employed who were supervised in their work. Service users said the carers treated them well. Staff were trained in caring for people with a learning disability, and given other training as part of their professional development. This included important subjects such as abuse of vulnerable adults, health and safety and principles of care and care planning. Service users also helped to train staff. The training was very good and showed carers what they wanted. The manager received supervision from the owners who also sent a regular report of their visit to the home to the Commission. The home was very well managed. Service users liked the manager and they had their say in how their home was managed. They received guidance in how to keep safe and had their own house rules to follow. The views of relatives and other visitors to the home were sought and the business and development plan showed a continuing investment both in the home and in staff. Professional opinion included ‘they are a well respected pro active service’. The home according to service users and relatives was very nicely decorated and furnished to how service users wanted. Furniture provided for them was of a good quality. They were consulted about any changes being made in staffing and in any work carried out in the home. What has improved since the last inspection? There were no improvements required at the last inspection. However investment into the home included: A new garage door being fitted and the outside of the property sandblasted. Two bedrooms were decorated. Service users gave training sessions to staff to help them care for them, as they wanted. This included staff learning makaton. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 7 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. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 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 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 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): 2,4,5 Service users had lived in the home for a long time. Before they came to live there they discussed what help they needed. They had a contract they understood. Staff were trained to care for people with a learning disability. Advice was taken from other professionals to make sure all care needs were met properly. EVIDENCE: There had been no new admissions since the last inspection. The service users in the home had been assessed prior to living in the home. They all had received had a contract. They were written and illustrated with pictures showing what the contract meant. Service users signed them. Staff cared for Service users. They were carefully recruited and trained to care for people with a learning disability. They worked with other professional people in caring for service users where needed. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 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 Service users benefited from good assessments to ensure that all their needs were considered. 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 fully in life in the home. EVIDENCE: 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 service users’ needed. Restrictions on service users doing what they liked that may cause them problems was recorded and agreed with them. Service users benefited from being involved in writing their own care plans. People had a member of staff referred to as a key worker to help them with special activities such as keeping their home nice, keeping appointments and being involved with their family. This type of help was extra to staff helping everyone each day. One service user consulted during inspection said she was Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 pleased with her carer. Carers had taken her on holiday with her friends and she was planning to see Sir Cliff Richards next year. 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 and changes needed in meeting needs or achieving goals. Service user goals were easy to follow. They showed who would do what to reach the desired outcome. Care plans were discussed at meetings and showed how decisions made involved service users. One comment about this was ‘you always think what is best for them and discuss it through with them’, and ‘more than happy with the level of care’. Relatives were kept informed of the level of care their relative had. Relatives who completed comments cards for the inspection were happy they were kept informed of important matters involving their relative. The service user who discussed her care during inspection said they were involved in staff and management meetings. They had weekly house meetings. They also had their own policies and procedures and ‘house rules’ everyone agreed. Service users benefited from living a fairly independent life. To help them achieve this information was recorded to keep them safe. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 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 lifestyle at the home and in the community. This included social activities and learning new skills for personal development. They were helped to keep in touch with their families and friends. Relatives and friends who visited were made welcome. Good advice was given to service users who developed special friendships. Service users were helped to plan and prepare a nutritious and varied diet that suited them. EVIDENCE: Weekly planners were used to show what each service user was doing. For example when they cooked a meal, cleaned their bedroom and had a bath. Staff helped them where needed. The planner they used was easy to follow. Service users were given opportunities for personal development. This was seen in care plans. Service users who completed comment cards as part of the inspection showed activities provided were suitable. They also said they pleased themselves what activity they joined in. Service users went to College, work and adult centres. Whatever they did it was to their own choosing. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Discussion with service users in the scheme showed how they made full use of community facilities. They went to the town regularly, had outings, holidays and went to concerts. These were thoroughly enjoyed. One relative who completed a comment card for the inspection stated ‘his every needs are provided, general living, social and health’. All enjoyed social occasions like a garden party held at Park House. The service user at home during inspection said she went out for a meal to celebrate her birthday and was looking forward to Christmas. They had parties. She also went out with a friend for a drink at weekends. Staff gave guidance to service users about personal relationships. The manager discussed this. 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. Service users were able to invite their relatives to social events organised by staff. Relatives who completed comments cards for the inspection said they were welcomed into the home’. One comment received at the home said ‘I know I can visit at any time I want’ Service users can comment on how staff looks after them 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 had their own house rules they also agreed on. The service user at home during inspection said the food was good. ‘She wasn’t cooking that night her friend was.’ They decided their own menus and took turns to cook. Staff helped them. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 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, By recording individual preferred routines likes and dislikes, this allowed both service users to be cared for in a way that suited them. Service users personal care was given when needed in a manner that respected their privacy and dignity. The healthcare of service users was monitored. The care plan each person had helped them to be understood and was very good. EVIDENCE: Service users routine was special to them. Individual records outlining preferred routines and likes and dislikes showed this, as they all did different things during the day and evening. Support with personal care if needed was given in private. Service users who completed comment cards as part of the inspection said their privacy was respected. The service user at home during inspection was happy with her carer. She kept up with her healthcare and had a ‘flu jab’ recently. Staff would go with her for appointments if this were needed. All service users who completed comment cards for the inspection said staff treated them well and they were well cared for. Service users had a healthcare plan written just for them and included Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 information about their medication, and what staff should be aware of if someone was not well and couldn’t say. Relatives who completed comment cards as part of the inspection showed in cases where people are unable to make decisions about their care they were consulted. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 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 in the manager and staff to deal with complaints properly. Relatives also shared this view. 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: Comments received from service users as part of the inspection said they ‘knew who to speak to if they were unhappy about their care’. The service user at home during inspection during conversation said staff listens to everyone in the home. They usually talked to their carers about matters, sometimes together and also individually. The complaints procedure was written and illustrated in a way to show service users their complaints would be taken seriously. Comments sent to the Commission also showed service users ‘felt safe’ in the home. Relative’s comments included ‘you always listen with any queries or concern I have, I have never had to complain and dare say I will never have to’. 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. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 24,25,28 Service users lived in a comfortable homely environment, which suited them. They had their own bedrooms that were private and furnished and decorated to their liking. The lounge/dining room, dining/kitchen, laundry, bathroom and toilets were comfortable and decorated and furnished to a high standard. EVIDENCE: Parkside is a large spacious house situated near to the town centre of Burnley. There are garden areas to the front and rear. Shared accommodation includes lounge/dining room, dining kitchen, bathroom and toilets and laundry. The service user at home during the inspection said her home was very comfortable. The home was decorated to the service users liking. A relative wrote ‘everything is in the house a house should have and is tastefully furnished’. Another relative commented her son ‘loves living at Parkside’. Service users are accommodated in single bedrooms. The service user at home during inspection was happy with her bedroom. She had what she needed in her room. She kept her room locked and had a key for the door. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 There is a separate laundry room. Service users do their own laundry with staff helping when learning this life skill. Written information received from the manager shows investment is made into keeping the property nice. This included decoration of two bedrooms, a new garage door and during inspection the outside of the property was being sandblasted. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31,32,33,34,35,36 The level of staffing was right for service users. Good staff recruitment procedures were followed. Service users had confidence in the staff working at the home. They 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: Staff worked in the home at times when service users needed help. Rotas showed how this worked. The number of staff present in the home at any time was linked to the needs of service users, and meant to be the least intrusive. Relatives who completed comments cards for the inspection said there was always enough staff on duty’. The service user at home said she was happy with the staff in the home. She had in the past interviewed people who came for jobs. Service users in the scheme could be part of an interview panel when people came for interview, although no new staff had started work for a long time. One relative commented’ your care towards my son is excellent’. Staff files for staff currently working in the scheme showed recruitment checks to be complete. Satisfactory references and Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) and Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 21 Protection of Vulnerable Adults (POVA) register check had been applied for, prior to employment. Staff had a job description to work to that outlined their responsibilities of care duties. They were also given a contract of employment. All staff had attended basic training. Information sent to the commission as part of the inspection gave the percentage of staff having completed a national vocational qualification in care level 2 and above as 50 . The manager encouraged staff to train and gave staff regular supervision. Service users helped to train staff. This was discussed. Two service users are involved in a service user network conference. They provide staff training, which has included ‘makaton’ and ‘what makes good staff from a service users view’. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 22 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,38,39,40,41,42,43 Service users, relatives and staff were happy with the way the home was managed. The running of the home was well organised, and service users and staff had an opportunity to say what they wanted to improve services. Service users and relatives were asked if they were satisfied with standards generally and the owners had in place a development plan showing investment into staff training and in the home. Guidance and support was given to staff, which helped service users quality of life experience in the home being good. Good practice in safe working practice and the health, safety and welfare of service users was considered daily. EVIDENCE: The home is owned by Mr and Mrs Zephir and managed by Sarah Casey the registered manager. The owners carry out monthly-unannounced visits to the home and send a copy of the record they make to the Commission. The service user at home was pleased with the manager. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 Service users had regular house meetings and could also speak to Mr and Mrs Zephir any time they wanted. A representative from the service users in the scheme attended staff and management meetings to put forward their ideas and views of how the home was run. Everyone then discusses how these ideas can work to the benefit of everyone. Staff had regular meetings. Service users take part in staff supervision. What they say is 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. Support was given with training and staff worked to a code of conduct and practice they received. Confidential records were locked away. Service users had the benefit of up to date relevant policies and procedure. These included their ‘house rules’, which they discussed. Service users views were listened to. Anonymous questionnaires were used. The views of service users and relatives from these regarding the care and facilities are published and made available for people to look at. Comments included ‘my son is mentally demanding on his carers, he receives the best care available’. Other professional people describe the team at Park Houses as ‘professional and caring’, and ‘the service promotes independence’. Insurance cover was in place and the property was well maintained. A business plan to show how improvements would be made for service users and staff was done for the year. This included general standards, staffing, quality standards and training for staff. The health, safety and welfare of service users was considered. They were involved in keeping safe. The service user at home said they had monthly fire drills and knew what to do to keep safe. A regular safety check around the home was done with proper information recorded to keep service users safe. Training in health and safety is also provided for staff to help them at work. All senior carers were qualified in first aid. Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 24 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No 1 2 3 4 5 Score X 3 X 3 3 Standard No 22 23 Score 3 4 ENVIRONMENT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score 4 3 3 3 X Standard No 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 STAFFING Score 3 3 X X 3 X X 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 3 4 3 3 CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Parkside Score 3 3 X X Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 25 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 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 26 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 Parkside DS0000009532.V252034.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 27 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!