England and Wales Care Standards Tribunal

 
GROVE LODGE CARE HOME, STOCKPORT (MR J R STOKES) V COMMISSION FOR SOCIAL CARE INSPECTION [2003] 246.NC 5 and 6 May 2004 Mr Anthony Wadling (Chairman) Mrs Susan Last Mr Jeff Cohen DECISION
1. This is an appeal against a decision of the then regulator National Care Standards Commission (NCSC) dated 18 November 2003 refusing to vary a condition of the registration of Grove Lodge Care Home so as to allow an increase in the number of persons for whom residential accommodation can be provided from 15 to 18.
2. At the hearing, Mr J R Stokes who is the nominated Responsible Individual for Grove Lodge presented his case with the assistance of Mrs Poynton, the Deputy Manager. Mr Peter Anderson of Counsel instructed by Hill Dickinson appeared for the Commission.
3. In addition to hearing evidence and with the agreement of the parties, we visited Grove Lodge and saw for ourselves the accommodation that is the subject matter of the dispute between them.
4. We made an order at the start of the proceedings under Regulation 18 of the Care Standards Tribunal Regulations 2002 that no resident of Grove Lodge may be identified in any publication. One resident gave evidence before us and she will be referred to as Mrs A pursuant to Regulation 27(3)(b). We took these decisions to protect the private life of those persons concerned in this matter.
5. On 30 July 2002, Grove Lodge was registered by NCSC as a Care Home for persons over 50 with Dementia or Mental Disorder. At this time, none of the bedrooms had en suite toilet and bathing facilities and only 9 of the 15 residents had the exclusive use of a bedroom.
6. The following year Mr Stokes had conversion work carried out at Grove Lodge on three rooms not previously used by residents. This work produced three additional bedrooms with en suite shower and toilet facilities. He then applied for a variation in the registration of the Home to increase the number of residents to 18. NCSC inspected the premises and agreed to allow in an increase in residents but only to 17.
7. NCSC refused to increase the permitted number of residents to 18 because of reservations concerning one of the newly converted rooms (referred to by the parties and in this Decision as Room 3). The principal reservation was that because the rooms were built into the roof void, the sloping ceilings limited the available headroom and consequently the amount of floor space that is actually usable by a resident. This problem was greater in Room 3 than in the other rooms. A wooden beam running across the width of the room and the en suite bathroom increased this problem. It also gave rise to difficulties for care staff and others who would need to come into the room.
8. Following our visit to Grove Lodge, Mr Stokes indicated that he was willing to remove the wooden beam. His builder told us that by replacing it with a steel beam, there would be no intrusion into the rooms at all. Mr Stokes also agreed to ensure that the shower room door would not in future impede access into Room 3 from the landing.
9. We accept that the objections made by the Commission as to the suitability of the room have some force in them. However, we also heard evidence from Mrs A, the prospective occupant of Room 3. Mrs A has been resident at Grove Lodge for 3 years. She told us that she has been happy at the Home and wishes to continue living there. Unfortunately, her health has been far from good and she has a colostomy. Currently Mrs A shares a bedroom and has to use the shared bathroom facilities used by all the residents in the Home. Given her circumstances, this situation is far from satisfactory.
10. When the three additional rooms were first built, Mrs A expressed a preference for Room 3 particularly because the en suite bathroom is larger than in the other two rooms. She also wished for a room in a more secluded and quiet part of the Home. Room 3 has both the facilities to meet her needs consequent upon her medical condition and sufficient personal privacy. As Mrs A is about five feet tall, she told us the limited headroom was not a problem for her.
11. We have therefore weighed the limitations on the suitability of the usable space in Room 3 as against the extent to which it meets the particular needs of Mrs A. Our decision is to allow the appeal so that the Additional Condition of Registration 1 is varied as follows;

The number of persons for whom residential accommodation is provided shall not exceed 18 person(s) Cat. DE or MD. In the event that Mrs A ceases to be resident of the Home, the number of persons for whom residential accommodation is provided shall not exceed 17 person(s).

12. We also add two further Additional Conditions of Registration that are to be given effect before the above variation has effect;

(i) The wooden beam that runs across the ceiling of Room 3 and the en suite bathroom is to be removed. Any replacement beam shall not intrude into the space occupied by Room 3 or the en suite bathroom below the current height of the ceiling of those rooms.

(ii) The door between Room 3 and the adjoining bathroom is to re-hung so that it does not impede in any way the opening of the door between Room 3 and the landing

Accordingly, we allow the appeal

13. Our decision is unanimous.

APPEAL ALLOWED AGAINST THE DECISION DATED 20 NOVEMBER 2003 TO REFUSE TO VARY THE REGISTRATION OF GROVE LODGE RESIDENTIAL HOME.

Mr Anthony Wadling

(Chairman)

Mrs Susan Last

Mr Jeff Cohen

Signed by the Chairman on this 17^th day of May 2004