Inspection on 17/10/05 for Stansfield Hall

This inspection was carried out on 17th October 2005.

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

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

Other inspections for this house

Stansfield Hall 30/07/09

Stansfield Hall 10/07/08

Stansfield Hall 16/07/07

Stansfield Hall 13/11/06

Stansfield Hall 26/04/06

Stansfield Hall 14/06/05

Stansfield Hall 07/10/04

Stansfield Hall 14/04/04

Similar services:

Chirnside House

Keer Sands Residential Home

Ruskin Lodge

Bushell House

Langrigg House

Parkside

Dystlegh Grange

Thornton Lodge

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

CARE HOMES FOR OLDER PEOPLE Stansfield Hall Stansfield Hall Temple Lane Littleborough Lancashire OL15 9QH Lead Inspector Diane Gaunt Unannounced Inspection 17th October 2005 09:00 X10015.doc Version 1.40 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.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 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. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Stansfield Hall Address Stansfield Hall Temple Lane Littleborough Lancashire OL15 9QH 01706 370096 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) Rajanikanth Selvanandan Care Home 22 Category(ies) of Old age, not falling within any other category registration, with number (22) of places Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: 1. 2. The home is registered for a maximum of 22 service users to include: up to 22 service users in the category of OP (Older People) The service should employ a suitably qualified and experienced manager who is registered with the Commission for Social Care Inspection. 14th June 2005 Date of last inspection Brief Description of the Service: Stansfield Hall is located approximately two miles from the centre of Littleborough. Originally a school, the stone building has been extended and adapted to provide personal care and accomodation for 22 service users aged 65 years and over. The home provides 14 single and 4 double bedrooms. Access to the home is up two steps, although there is good ramped access to the side of the home via the conservatory. Grab rails are provided at each side of the steps. All accomodation is on ground floor level. For safety reasons there is limited access to gardens. A small patio area is provided and is used by service users in fine weather. Parking for approximatley 8 cars is provided with further on street parking available as needed. There are a number of shops nearby but they are not easily reached by residents. A regular bus service to Rochdale and Todmorden stops close to the home. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. This inspection took place over 8 hours. The home had not been told beforehand that the inspector would visit. The inspector looked around the building and looked at a number of records. Nine of the sixteen residents, three relatives, three senior carers, and the acting manager were spoken with. Care practice was observed. Requirements listed at the end of the report include 10 that have not been fully met since the last inspection. A registered manager had not been in post for 11 months, the deputy had been acting as manager for over 5 months. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? New carpets had been provided in a number of bedrooms, and some bedrooms and a bathroom had been decorated. A new bath and hoist had been provided and grab rails fixed beside the steps to the front door. Training for staff had increased and the acting manager was spending more time talking to staff about how best to do their job and the training they needed to help them to do it. More activities were being provided and some residents enjoyed them very much. Some improvement was seen in how medicines and tablets were stored, and assessment of those residents who wished to look after their own medicines and tablets. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 6 What they could do better: Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 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 Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 6 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Each service user has a written contract/ statement of terms and conditions with the home. No service user moves into the home without having had his/her needs assessed and been assured that these will be met. Service users and their representatives know that the home they enter will meet their needs. Prospective service users and their relatives and friends have an opportunity to visit and assess the quality, facilities and suitability of the home. Service users assessed and referred solely for intermediate care are helped to maximise their independence and return home. The Commission considers Standards 3 and 6 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): None of these standards were assessed. EVIDENCE: Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 9 Health and Personal Care The intended outcomes for Standards 7 – 11 are: 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The service user’s health, personal and social care needs are set out in an individual plan of care. Service users’ health care needs are fully met. Service users, where appropriate, are responsible for their own medication, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. Service users feel they are treated with respect and their right to privacy is upheld. Service users are assured that at the time of their death, staff will treat them and their family with care, sensitivity and respect. The Commission considers Standards 7, 8, 9 and 10 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 7 and 9. With one noted exception, residents’ health, personal and social care needs were set out in an individual plan of care. Some improvements had been made in medication handling but best practice was not always adhered to, increasing the risk of administration error. EVIDENCE: Individual plans of care were available and three were inspected. With one exception, they clearly recorded care required and inclusion of a social history ensured a person-centred approach. The care plans had been regularly reviewed by staff on a monthly basis and six monthly reviews with the resident and relative had been held. Relatives and some residents spoken with confirmed this was the case. Outcomes were clearly recorded along with the resident or relative’s agreement. However, one care plan inspected did not include an action plan in respect of falling, despite the resident having fallen 4 times in the previous 7 weeks, neither had the falls co-ordinator been contacted. All those interviewed were satisfied with care provision at the home. The acting manager was unable to confirm that all carers handling medication had completed medication training although a rolling programme of training had commenced. Three residents administered some of their prescribed Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 10 medicines, written assessment of safe self-administration was available for only two residents. The Medication Administration Records (MAR) examined were generally up-todate but there were some ‘blanks’ where administration or the reason for nonadministration was not recorded. Where variable doses e.g. ‘One or two’ were prescribed the number of tablets given was not recorded, information supporting the decision to give either one or two tablets was not documented. One record examined did not accurately record the dosage given following a verbal dose change. Where residents were prescribed the same medicine a single residents supply was used. The medication storage had been reviewed but the lock to the medicines trolley cupboard was inadequate and the trolley was not tethered. Medication policies were in need of review following a change in supplying pharmacy. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 11 Daily Life and Social Activities The intended outcomes for Standards 12 - 15 are: 12. 13. 14. 15. Service users find the lifestyle experienced in the home matches their expectations and preferences, and satisfies their social, cultural, religious and recreational interests and needs. Service users maintain contact with family/ friends/ representatives and the local community as they wish. Service users are helped to exercise choice and control over their lives. Service users receive a wholesome appealing balanced diet in pleasing surroundings at times convenient to them. The Commission considers all of the above key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,14 and 15 Whilst provision of activities at the home satisfied and met the expectations, preferences and needs of some residents, it did not meet them all. Residents were given opportunity to exercise choice and control over their lives. Whilst a balanced diet was provided and enjoyed by the majority of residents the menu would benefit from additional choices. EVIDENCE: Improvement was seen in the provision of activities in that an activities organiser was employed on two afternoons a week. Some residents spoke with pleasure of the flower arranging, painting and other craft activities they undertook. Another enjoyed being taken to the Blind Club by the organiser. Staff supplemented activities provided by the organiser e.g. manicures, bingo, dancing and singalongs to old time music. However, a minority of residents spoken with thought the activities were not suitable for them due to reduced co-ordination or deteriorating sight. Suitable activities were not provided for those with dementia either. A number of residents were content to sit in their rooms and would not join in with activities, although records showed that staff continued to invite and encourage them to each session. Residents said they had enjoyed a summer fair at which musical entertainment was provided, and a visit from local school children who sang songs the residents knew. A number of residents said they would enjoy more musical entertainment. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 12 Observation and interviews with residents, relatives and staff showed that flexibility was offered in relation to the activities of daily living. Residents got up and went to bed at a time of their choosing; could go out with friends and family and see visitors at the home; and were not restricted as to where they could spend time within the Home. Those interviewed said they were given a choice of food, could decide whether to have a bath or not, and decided what clothes they would wear. Each had made individual arrangements regarding their finances and where the acting manager was involved, there were no restrictions on access to money. The Statement of Purpose recorded that residents could access their records although those interviewed were unsure about this. None of them wished to do so however. Observation and discussion showed that residents were able to bring their furniture and possessions with them if they wished. One resident’s piano had been accommodated at the home and a ‘lounge’ area created within the bedroom. Another example of good practice was seen in the routine staff followed to ensure a chosen morning routine was followed: the resident’s daily newspaper was taken to the bedroom before breakfast, allowing the resident time to wash, dress and read some news before breakfast was served in the room. Menus inspected were seen to provide a varied, balanced and nutritious diet. The main meal was served at teatime and this arrangement suited the residents interviewed, who all enjoyed the food. However, a number commented that the quality of cooking was not as good at weekends, as the weekend cook had left and carers were doing the cooking. A number also commented on the repetition of soup and sandwiches at lunchtime – this comment was also made at the last inspection in June 2005. Whilst the cook and staff said that an alternative would be provided if requested, observation showed that alternatives were not routinely offered to all residents when they were asked for their lunchtime meal choice, although on the day of inspection an alternative was provided for one resident. Recommendation was made at the last inspection that a hot alternative to the main meal was also provided but on the day of inspection the alternative was salad. Suitable provision was made for those needing special diets i.e. diabetic and soft diets; staff gave appropriate assistance to those needing it. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 13 Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 16 - 18 are: 16. 17. 18. Service users and their relatives and friends are confident that their complaints will be listened to, taken seriously and acted upon. Service users’ legal rights are protected. Service users are protected from abuse. The Commission considers Standards 16 and 18 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): None of these standards were assessed. EVIDENCE: Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 14 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 19 – 26 are: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Service users live in a safe, well-maintained environment. Service users have access to safe and comfortable indoor and outdoor communal facilities. Service users have sufficient and suitable lavatories and washing facilities. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. Service users’ own rooms suit their needs. Service users live in safe, comfortable bedrooms with their own possessions around them. Service users live in safe, comfortable surroundings. The home is clean, pleasant and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 19 and 26 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): None of these standards were inspected. EVIDENCE: Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 15 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 27 and 29 Recruitment and selection procedures had improved and, with one exception, provided sufficient safeguards for the protection of residents living at the home. Sufficient staffing hours were provided to meet residents needs during the day but were in need of review in the evenings. EVIDENCE: Inspection of three staff files showed improvement in the home’s recruitment and selection procedures. However, a carer had been employed with a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check undertaken by a previous employer 9 months prior to her appointment at the home. A recent photograph of one staff member was not held at the home, and copies of qualifications not held on file. A training matrix had been devised but did not record all courses completed by staff. There had been few changes in the staff team since the last inspection. Rotas for the week of inspection and 3 previous weeks were inspected. However, a rota for ancillary staff was not kept and the carers’ rota did not record changes; time sheets had to be inspected alongside rotas to establish hours worked therefore. Sufficient hours were provided to meet the minimum requirements. However, only two staff were on duty most evenings from 5.00pm. During this time they were responsible for helping residents to bed, preparing and clearing away supper and doing the laundry. Residents spoken to said that whilst response time to call bells was mostly quick, there were occasions when they had to wait for them to be answered. Staff considered that on some evenings two staff were sufficient to meet all care needs comfortably but on other occasions this was not so. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 16 Residents spoke positively of staff, describing them as friendly and caring. Relatives were also positive about staff who they said welcomed them into the home and kept them updated about the resident’s care. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 17 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 at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 31, 33, 36 and 38. A registered manager had not been in post at the home for 11 months, management responsibilities had therefore not been fully discharged. Residents were not sufficiently consulted about the running of the home. Not all staff were appropriately supervised. Some practices did not promote and safeguard health, safety and welfare of the people using the service. EVIDENCE: The home had been without a registered manager since November 2004. The deputy manager was acting manager at the time of the inspection. She had no management training but had enrolled on an NVQ level 4 course in management and care. In the absence of a registered manager the provider visited the home on 2 days a week. However, this oversight had been insufficient to ensure all requirements and recommendations made at the last inspection were met within timescale. Despite requirement having been made, monthly monitoring reports written by the provider regarding provision at the home were not written for the acting manager or CSCI. Neither was the home informing CSCI of notifiable incidents as required. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 18 Staff, residents and relatives considered the deputy to be open and approachable. Residents and relatives knew who she was and said they would go to her if there was a matter they needed addressing. Whilst residents and/or their relatives were consulted regarding their care plans on a six monthly basis they were not routinely canvassed for their views about the running of the home either by meetings or satisfaction questionnaires. A staff meeting was held in August but meetings were irregular and minutes not taken. The home did not have a quality assurance system in place and although an annual development plan had been written by the previous acting manager it was not being actioned and reviewed on an ongoing basis. Financial procedures were not inspected as records were not available. Improvement was seen in the provision of formal staff supervision to a number of staff. However, not all staff had received regular supervision. Those interviewed considered supervision sessions to be helpful and supportive. It was noted the detail of the sessions was not recorded. Sufficient staff had been trained in 1st Aid to ensure one per shift was on duty. The acting manager had arranged health and safety training for all staff in the form of distance learning and at the time of the inspection, staff were awaiting their results. Some, but not all, staff had begun training in food hygiene, moving and handling and infection control. Four kitchen assistants had not had food hygiene training, although two were on a distance learning course. During the inspection the corridor lighting went out. An electrician was immediately called to repair it. Residents also said there was a problem with a light fitting in the conservatory. Although confirmation of a satisfactory 5 yearly electrical test was held on file, dated 19/02/01, the provider would be advised to undertake a further test of electric wiring at the home. Two light bulbs were not working in the conservatory. A fire lecture had been held in September 2005 and 14 of 24 staff attended. Fire drills had also been held but only during the day. Fire precautions/equipment were regularly tested. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 19 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 X X X N/A HEALTH AND PERSONAL CARE Standard No Score 7 2 8 X 9 2 10 X 11 X DAILY LIFE AND SOCIAL ACTIVITIES Standard No Score 12 2 13 X 14 3 15 2 COMPLAINTS AND PROTECTION Standard No Score 16 X 17 X 18 X X X X X X X X X STAFFING Standard No Score 27 2 28 X 29 2 30 X MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION Standard No 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Score 1 X 2 X X 2 X 1 Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 20 Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? Yes STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. 1 Standard OP7 Regulation 15 Requirement That advice is taken and care plans record action required with regard to residents who fall regularly. Accredited medication training must be provided for all staff who administer medication. (Previous timescale of 30/12/04 not met) All medication records including those for the assessment of safe self-administration, and for administration must be complete, clear, accurate and up-to-date. (Previous timescale of 30/08/05 not met) Medication must normally be administered from residents’ own labelled supplies. (Previous timescale of 30/08/05 not met) All medication must be securely stored. Additional activities must be planned to meet residents’ needs both on a group and individual basis. (Previous timescale of 15/09/05 not met) A weekend cook must be appointed. DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Timescale for action 17/11/05 2 OP9 12 31/12/05 3 OP9 13(2) 05/12/05 4 OP9 13(2) 05/12/05 5 6 OP9 OP12 13(2) 19 05/12/05 30/11/05 7 OP15 18 30/11/05 Stansfield Hall Version 5.0 Page 21 8 OP18 18 9 OP27 18 10 11 OP27 OP29 17(2) 19 12 13 OP31 OP31 8 26 14 15 OP31 OP33 37 24 16 17 OP34 OP38 25 13 18 OP38 13 Staff must receive adequate training with regard to protection of vulnerable adults, including use of the Inter-agency procedure. (Previous timescale of 31/10/05 not met) The acting manager must monitor and review evening staffing levels to ensure a safe service is provided. The acting manager must keep accurate rotas for each staff group employed at the home. The home must take a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check on the carer who was employed with a CRB undertaken by another agency and ensure all records required by Regulation 19 Schedule 2 are held at the home. Application to register a manager must be made. (Previous timescale of 31/08/05 not met) Regulation 26 reports must be completed by the registered owner on a monthly basis and copies provided for the acting manager and CSCI. (Previous timescale of 15/07/05 not met) The CSCI must be informed of all notifiable incidents within 24 hours of their occurrence. That residents and relatives views are sought in order to ensure an effective quality assurance and quality monitoring system. A current financial and business plan and year end accounts must be forwarded to CSCI. Food hygiene training must be provided for all staff who assist with preparation and serving of food. (Previous timescale of 30/12/04 not met) Kitchen assistants must complete food hygiene training. DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc 31/12/05 17/11/05 17/11/05 31/10/05 30/11/05 17/11/05 18/10/05 31/12/05 17/11/05 31/12/05 17/11/05 Page 22 Stansfield Hall Version 5.0 19 OP38 13 20 21 22 OP38 OP38 OP38 18 & 23 23 23 Adequate training in moving and handling and infection control must be provided for all staff. (Previous timescale of 30/12/04 not met) All staff must attend an annual fire lecture and have at least one fire drill per year. Hoists must be tested by a competent person every 6 months. Thermostatic mixer valves must be serviced and legionella tests undertaken annually. 31/12/05 30/11/05 30/11/05 30/11/05 RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Refer to Standard OP9 OP9 OP9 OP9 OP19 OP19 OP30 OP33 OP36 Good Practice Recommendations The medication policies and procedures should be reviewed and updated. The self-administration assessments should be expanded to include details of support needed for identified selfadministered medications. Information regarding the safe use of ‘when required’ medicines should be recorded. The ‘fridge should be defrosted and the temperature recorded. Worn easy chairs should be replaced. Action should be taken to reduce call bell noise, whilst ensuring it can be heard by staff throughout the building. Staff should receive training to meet residents’ individual needs e.g. dementia care. That regular resident, relative and staff meetings are held and minuted. All care staff should receive formal supervision 6 times per year, the content of which should be recorded, agreed and signed. Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.R01.S.doc Version 5.0 Page 23 Commission for Social Care Inspection Bolton, Bury, Rochdale and Wigan Office Turton Suite Paragon Business Park Chorley New Road Horwich, Bolton BL6 6HG 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 Stansfield Hall DS0000052796.V259048.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!