Aegis Parkview

6 DRUMMOND Street, REDCLIFFE, WA, 6104

1. Assessment contact Performance ReportJan 7, 2025

   An assessment contact was conducted with this service on 07/01/2025 to 07/01/2025. The attached Performance Report details the assessment of performance against the Aged Care Quality Standards following the assessment contact.

   source ↗
2. Assessment contact (performance assessment) – siteFeb 2, 2024

   Prepared by M Glenn

   source ↗
3. Assessment contact Performance ReportJan 3, 2024

   An assessment contact was conducted with this service on 03 January 2024. The attached Performance Report details the assessment of performance against the Aged Care Quality Standards following the assessment contact.

   source ↗
4. Accreditation decisionAug 15, 2023

   Following a site audit conducted on 20 June 2023 to 22 June 2023, the Commission made a decision on 15 August 2023 to re-accredit this service. The period of accreditation of the service will expire on 15 August 2026.

   source ↗
5. Site AuditAug 15, 2023

   Prepared by E. Blance

   source ↗
   AI report insightsAI-extracted · qwen2.5:32b

   The performance report for Aegis Parkview highlights compliance with most standards, but identifies non-compliance in Personal care and clinical care (Standard 3), Organisation’s service environment (Standard 5), Feedback and complaints (Standard 6), and Organisational governance (Standard 8). Key areas needing improvement include consistent wound management, effective restrictive practices management, enabling consumers to move freely outdoors, and using feedback for continuous improvement.

   Standard 1 Consumer dignity and choiceCompliant

   The assessor found that the service treats consumers with respect, supports them in exercising choices, and maintains privacy.

   • Met Requirement 1(3)(a) — Most consumers confirmed they were always treated with dignity and respect. Staff demonstrated a knowledge and understanding of individual consumers and their backgrounds.
   • Met Requirement 1(3)(b) — Consumers stated staff knew their background and what was important to them, and care planning documents evidenced cultural backgrounds and preferences.
   • Met Requirement 1(3)(c) — Staff supported consumers in making decisions about their care and maintaining relationships. Care plans detailed consumer wishes for care delivery and involvement of others.
   • Met Requirement 1(3)(d) — Consumers were supported to take risks, with risk assessments used to assist informed decisions.
   • Met Requirement 1(3)(e) — Information provided was current and timely, enabling consumers to exercise choice. Notices included weekly activity calendars and advocacy information.
   • Met Requirement 1(3)(f) — Consumers expressed satisfaction with privacy practices. Staff maintained confidentiality through password-protected systems and respectful interactions.

   Standard 2 Ongoing assessment and planning with consumersCompliant

   The service demonstrated that ongoing assessments inform care delivery, address consumer needs, involve partnerships, and are effectively communicated.

   • Met Requirement 2(3)(a) — Assessments considered risks to health and well-being. Deficiencies were identified but had no impact on consumers.
   • Met Requirement 2(3)(b) — Needs, goals, preferences, including advance care planning, are addressed in assessments. Some documentation was generic or incomplete but did not affect consumer outcomes.
   • Met Requirement 2(3)(c) — Consumers and representatives were involved in assessment and planning processes. Care plans were reviewed annually.
   • Met Requirement 2(3)(d) — Outcomes of assessments are effectively communicated to consumers, with care plans readily available through an electronic system.
   • Met Requirement 2(3)(e) — Care and services were reviewed regularly when circumstances changed or incidents impacted needs. Some documentation was inconsistent but did not affect consumer outcomes.

   Standard 3 Personal care and clinical careNon-compliant

   The service failed to provide consistent wound management, pain assessments, and effective restrictive practices management.

   • Not met Requirement 3(3)(a) — Wounds were not consistently reviewed or photographed. Pain assessments were not always conducted as per policy.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(b) — High impact risks were managed appropriately, with monitoring and timely responses to changes in consumer conditions.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(c) — End-of-life care was appropriate, maximizing comfort and preserving dignity. Staff knowledge around end-of-life care was sound.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(d) — Deterioration or changes in consumer conditions were recognized and responded to timely.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(e) — Information about consumers' condition, needs, and preferences was documented and communicated effectively within the organization.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(f) — Timely referrals to other organizations and providers were made appropriately.
   • Met Requirement 3(3)(g) — Infection control practices and antimicrobial stewardship were effective, with policies guiding staff practice.

   Risks: Wound management was inconsistent.; Pain assessments were not always conducted as per policy.

   Recommendations: Ensure consistent wound review and documentation.; Conduct pain assessments in line with organizational policy.

   Standard 4 Services and supports for daily livingCompliant

   The service provided safe, effective services that met consumer needs and promoted independence and well-being.

   • Met Requirement 4(3)(a) — Consumers expressed satisfaction with daily living supports. Staff demonstrated knowledge of individual consumer needs.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(b) — Services promoted emotional, spiritual, and psychological well-being through activities like church services and volunteer visits.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(c) — Consumers were encouraged to participate in community activities and maintain social relationships. Lifestyle schedules provided varied activities.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(d) — Information about consumer conditions, needs, and preferences was communicated effectively within the organization.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(e) — Timely referrals to other organizations were made appropriately.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(f) — Meals were of suitable quality and quantity, with fresh daily cooking and texture-modified meals available.
   • Met Requirement 4(3)(g) — Equipment was safe, clean, well-maintained. New processes ensured regular cleaning and maintenance of wheelchairs.

   Standard 5 Organisation’s service environmentNon-compliant

   The service environment was welcoming but did not enable consumers to move freely outdoors.

   • Met Requirement 5(3)(a) — Environment was welcoming, with wide corridors and personalized rooms.
   • Not met Requirement 5(3)(b) — Consumers were not able to move freely outdoors without staff assistance. External doors required staff activation for entry/exit.
   • Met Requirement 5(3)(c) — Furniture, fittings, and equipment were safe, clean, well-maintained, and suitable for consumers.

   Risks: Consumers could not move freely outdoors without staff assistance.

   Recommendations: Ensure consumers can move freely both indoors and outdoors.

   Standard 6 Feedback and complaintsNon-compliant

   Feedback mechanisms were in place, but feedback was not consistently reviewed to improve care.

   • Met Requirement 6(3)(a) — Consumers and representatives understood how to provide feedback and make complaints.
   • Met Requirement 6(3)(b) — Access to advocacy services was known, with some consumers happy for their representatives to advocate on their behalf.
   • Met Requirement 6(3)(c) — Complaints were responded to promptly and open disclosure processes were applied.
   • Not met Requirement 6(3)(d) — Feedback and complaints were not consistently reviewed or used for continuous improvement. Systems for capturing feedback data were ineffective.

   Recommendations: Improve systems to capture and review feedback and complaints effectively.

   Standard 7 Human resourcesCompliant

   The workforce was planned, trained, and supported to deliver safe and quality care.

   • Met Requirement 7(3)(a) — Workforce planning ensured delivery of safe and quality care. Strategies were in place for unplanned leave.
   • Met Requirement 7(3)(b) — Staff interactions with consumers were kind, caring, and respectful.
   • Met Requirement 7(3)(c) — Workforce was competent with qualifications and knowledge to perform roles effectively.
   • Met Requirement 7(3)(d) — Staff were recruited, trained, equipped, and supported for their roles. Training currency was being managed.
   • Met Requirement 7(3)(e) — Regular performance assessments of staff were conducted through monthly self-checks and annual appraisals.

   Standard 8 Organisational governanceNon-compliant

   The service did not demonstrate effective management of restrictive practices or ensure consumers could move freely.

   • Not met Requirement 8(3)(e) — Management of restrictive practices was ineffective, with discrepancies in monitoring registers and incomplete informed consents.

   Risks: Ineffective management of restrictive practices.; Consumers could not move freely outdoors without staff assistance.

   Recommendations: Ensure effective management of restrictive practices including obtaining informed consent as required by legislation.; Support consumers to move freely in and out of the service environment.

   Generated by qwen2.5:32b on 11 June 2026 from the published Performance Report. AI output — may contain errors; verify against the source document and the official findings above.

6. Site audit Performance ReportJun 22, 2023

   A site audit was conducted with this service on 20 June 2023 to 22 June 2023. The attached Performance Report details the assessment of performance against the Aged Care Quality Standards following the site audit.

   source ↗
7. Exceptional CircumstancesApr 28, 2023

   During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission has temporarily modified our Regulatory Program, including the suspension of site audits to determine whether to accredit, not to re-accredit or vary the periods of accreditation for a service. In order to give effect to continuity of accreditation the Department of Health has, under Section 42.5 of the Aged Care Act 1997, made a decision to grant ‘exceptional circumstances’ to this service until 23 November 2023. The service remains subject to compliance monitoring by the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission.

   source ↗
8. Assessment Contact - SiteDec 19, 2022

   Prepared by J Renna

   source ↗
   AI report insightsAI-extracted · qwen2.5:32b

   The performance report for Aegis Parkview highlights non-compliance with Standard 3 Personal care and clinical care due to ineffective management of high-impact or high-prevalence risks associated with consumer care. The primary issues revolve around the use of chemical restraint, falls, weight loss, and pressure injuries that were not effectively managed despite interventions.

   Standard 3 Personal care and clinical careNon-compliant

   The service was unable to demonstrate effective management of high impact or high prevalence risks associated with the care of each consumer, specifically in relation to falls, restraint and swallowing.

   • Not met 3(3)(b) Effective management of high impact or high prevalence risks associated with the care of each consumer. — The service was unable to demonstrate effective management of high impact or high prevalence risks, specifically in relation to falls, restraint and swallowing. Evidence showed that chemical restraint for one consumer had not been effectively managed, leading to multiple falls, weight loss, and a pressure injury.

   Risks: The use of chemical restraint for one consumer was not effectively managed, resulting in 13 falls, significant weight loss (26.81kg), and the development of an unstageable pressure injury.; Oral thrush was identified by a representative but not by staff attending to the consumer’s daily oral care.

   Recommendations: Ensure staff have the skills and knowledge to understand risks associated with consumers’ care and implement effective preventative strategies.; Provide appropriate care relating to behaviour management and medication administration.; Identify changes to consumers’ personal and clinical care needs and implement appropriate monitoring processes.; Effectively communicate and ensure understanding of policies, procedures, and guidelines in relation to the management of high impact or high prevalence clinical risks by staff.; Monitor staff compliance with the service’s policies, procedures, and guidelines.

   Generated by qwen2.5:32b on 11 June 2026 from the published Performance Report. AI output — may contain errors; verify against the source document and the official findings above.

9. Assessment contact Performance ReportNov 10, 2022

   An assessment contact was conducted with this service on 10 November 2022. The attached Performance Report details the assessment of performance against the Aged Care Quality Standards following the assessment contact.

   source ↗
10. Assessment contact Performance ReportSep 9, 2021

    An assessment contact was conducted with this service on 09 September 2021. The attached Performance Report details the assessment of performance against the Aged Care Quality Standards following the assessment contact.

    source ↗
11. Accreditation decisionMar 6, 2020

    Following a site audit conducted on 04 March 2020 to 06 March 2020, the Commission made a decision on 07 April 2020 to re-accredit this service. The period of accreditation of the service will expire on 23 May 2023. The Performance Report is attached.

    source ↗
12. AssessmentMar 15, 2017

    Following an audit we decided that this home met 44 of the 44 expected outcomes of the Accreditation Standards and would be accredited for three years until 23 May 2020.

    source ↗
13. AssessmentFeb 26, 2014

    Following an audit we decided that this home met 44 of the 44 expected outcomes of the Accreditation Standards and would be accredited for three years until 23 May 2017.

    source ↗
14. AssessmentMar 1, 2011
    source ↗

No regulatory actions recorded.