At its meeting on 23rd November 2002, the Leslie House 21 Group, agreed unanimously to decline the offer that was made on 26th October 2002 by Mike Sawyer, the Head of Social Work of Fife Council, viz. to move the 11 residents in a planned way into an eight bedded residential unit, which is being opened up after having been closed for some time, in Alan McLure House, which is one of the Council's residential homes in Glenrothes.

The Group agreed to decline the offer only after having considered it very carefully both on an individual and collective basis. As part of that consideration, friends and relatives of 8 of the residents, who, if not already familiar with Alan McLure House, visited the home and discussed the services and accommodation, which would be available to the residents with senior members of staff.

It is the view of the Group that Alan McLure House, while being comfortable and well managed and typical of a modern purpose built residential home, does not have the space available to be able to offer the residents the high standards of care and accommodation, which they currently enjoy in Leslie House.

In particular, the Group noted that there is not a single facility on offer in Alan McLure House that is not available in Leslie House. Moreover, being an older building, Leslie House has spacious accommodation well suited to the use of aids such as walking frames and wheelchairs and situations whereby two care assistants are required to move individuals. It is also sufficiently spacious to enable those residents, who so wish, to separate themselves from time to time, from their fellow residents but still remain within the public areas of their home. Such suitability is something that is not to be found in every case in modern purpose built accommodation.

In addition, the proposed combined living/dining area in Alan McLure House is not large enough to accommodate eight of the residents in Leslie House. This is because some residents use walking aids, one is wheelchair bound, others require special reclining chairs, and several require the assistance of two care assistants for all transfers and, being unable to mobilise, must transfer using use wheel chairs.

The living space in Alan McLure House is suitable only for collective shared activities. The space is unable to accommodate different activities simultaneously. Nor is it large enough to be able to accommodate those instances whereby, because of the nature of her dementia, one resident can become agitated and aggressive.

The bedrooms are significantly smaller than those in Leslie House. Because of the limitations in size of the living accommodation, the size of the bedrooms becomes significant, as they are the only space available to do anything other than sit with the larger group and, as a consequence, be required to share in any group activity e.g. watching television. At Leslie House there is sufficient space to have multiple activities taking place in the lounge and dining areas, e.g. reading, sitting quietly, singing, talking listening to music and watching TV, all without too much encumbrance to neighbours. For those who smoke it is the only space in which to do so. If a resident wants to talk or listen to music or read, which activities many residents enjoy, the bedroom in the only space in which this can be done and it must therefore be done away from the companionable atmosphere of a lounge. At Alan McLure House, therefore, the bedroom is more than a place to sleep. Moreover, unlike Leslie House, the bedrooms are too small to permit the residents to keep their personal furnishings.

Apart from one small room in Alan McLure House, which is also used as a meeting room, the bedroom is the only place to receive visitors. The importance of being able to receive visitors in the lounge cannot be over-emphasised. In the course of so doing, visitors, in effect, are able to visit with several, if not all, of the residents thus underpinning the family atmosphere, which is essential if a residential home is to be a real home.

Even if the sitting/living area and the bedrooms were of suitable sizes, all 11 residents could not be accommodated in a single unit. That means that three residents would be located and, as a consequence, isolated, one in each of three of the other four units in Alan McLure House. Based, inter-alia, on evidence submitted by a consultant geriatric psychiatrist, keeping elderly, frail and demented residents together a single unit, is of fundamental importance to the Leslie House 21 Group. Alan McLure House is unable to meet that fundamental criterion.

Advice from the Care Commission relative to these concerns has not been available to the Leslie House 21 Group, because the Head of Social Work, four weeks after making the offer, has not yet made an application to the Commission for the extension of use, which he is proposing. Until he does so, the Care Commission is not in a position to offer advice on these crucial concerns.

Neither can the Leslie House 21 Group enjoy the benefit of advice from the Unit Manager at Alan McLure House, who, it is understood, has been advised by the Head of Social Work not to visit Leslie House until the offer he has made has been accepted. Until the Unit Manager visits Leslie House and is, as a consequence, aware of the individual and collective needs of the residents and the standards of care and accommodation currently enjoyed by them, she is not in a position to say whether or not the facilities at Alan McLure House can satisfy those needs and standards.

The Group would welcome a solution that meets all of the relevant criteria. In the absence of suitable alternative accommodation the continued use of Leslie House as residential home is the only solution.