Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Ellison, the Minister representing the Minister for Ageing. Is the minister aware that a report on the Belvedere Park Nursing Home in Melbourne in August this year found it failed 42 of 44 care standards, putting residents at serious risk? Didn’t that audit of the nursing home find that it failed to provide the residents with appropriate nursing and clinical care, medication management, nutrition, hydration and infection control? Didn’t the audit team observe that the foul stench permeating the facility impacted on the quality of life of residents and made visiting relatives vomit? Given this nursing home repeatedly and seriously failed care standards in 1998, 1999 and 2000, can the minister now advise whether there were any inspections between 2000 and 2007; and, if so, how many of them were unannounced?

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 16 August 2007, the Department of Health and Ageing imposed sanctions on the operator of Belvedere Park Nursing Home in Sydenham, Melbourne, revoking its approval as a provider of aged-care services and its allocation of residential care places. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal has made an order which has stayed the operation and implementation of the department’s decision to impose sanctions on the operator of that nursing home, pending a full hearing of the matter. The AAT has ordered that Saitta Pty Ltd can continue to operate as an approved provider of aged care and will be able to admit residents to the home as long as it appoints an administrator approved by the department who has the clinical expertise to make decisions about the operation of the home and the care of residents.

The department has advised that, as of today, it has approved the administrator nominated by the approved provider. The department has only very limited avenues of appeal in relation to the order of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The department has, however, instructed its lawyers to seek an urgent hearing with the AAT to finalise this matter. I am advised that the last resident left Belvedere Park at 6 pm on 22 August 2007. All 25 residents are now relocated in other homes. The department and the Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency are continuing to monitor the home to determine if new residents are admitted. If this occurs the department and the agency will monitor the care and services provided at the home.

The department imposed the original sanctions because the provider failed to meet 42 out of 44 accreditation outcomes as recommended by assessors of the Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency. A review audit conducted by the agency between 6 and 10 August 2007 found that the home had serious and widespread problems both in relation to the provision of care and the overall living environment.

The other part of the senator’s question was in relation to the accreditation history of the home. In relation to Belvedere Park, I can say that it has had a history of serious noncompliance from 1998 to 2002 in response to which the department imposed sanctions on five occasions. From August 2002 until the end of 2006 the agency monitored Belvedere Park but it did not find noncompliance. The recent very serious noncompliance was identified in an unannounced visit by the agency on 23 July 2007 following the receipt of a complaint by the department. Some noncompliance was identified by the agency and the home was placed on a timetable for improvement.

In a subsequent visit on 3 August 2007 the agency was not satisfied with progress and conducted a full review audit. During that audit widespread noncompliance was identified. The agency determined that there was a serious risk to residents and of course referred this matter to the department and the department took immediate action and imposed sanctions. As for previous accreditation from 2002 to the end of 2006, there was monitoring of the home and I believe that prior to 2002 previous sanctions were imposed on five occasions between 1998 and 2000— (Time expired)

Claire Moore (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. We are interested in the process of the monitoring that you identified between 2002 and 2006 and, specifically, the number of visits that took place. How many of these spot checks visits were unannounced? Given that the findings of the subsequent audit that you mentioned described a complete breakdown in care standards, clinical records, staff training and process, isn’t it clear that the breach of care standards had been going on for sometime? On what grounds can the government claim that the failures were only recent when its own report indicates an entrenched and systematic failure to provide proper care to failed residents in the facility?

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was going on to say that between 2002 and 2003 there were nine unannounced visits by the agency, as I mentioned earlier. Also in 2001 and 2002, as well as in 2005, accreditation site visits were conducted. I had previously mentioned that there were sanctions imposed on prior occasions and that there had been noncompliance over the period of time. This is a situation which has been taken very seriously and the department and the agency have taken appropriate action.