Park House Care Home

Updated 18 March 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 25 February 2021 and was announced.

Updated 18 March 2021

This unannounced inspection of Park House Care Home took place on 12 June 2018.

At the last inspection in June 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’. We found during this inspection that the service remained ‘Good.’

Park House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Park House Care Home is registered to provide accommodation for a maximum of 29 people who require help with their daily lives such as assistance with personal care and who may be living with dementia.

The two-storey building is situated among pleasant grounds in a rural location near to Sandbach.

At the time of our inspection there were 26 people living at the home.

The home is registered as a partnership and has two registered managers who are closely related to each other. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons.’ Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Both of the registered managers continued to be fully involved in the home despite their different roles and different responsibilities. An additional family member who was the deputy manager and undergoing training at our last inspection, was now fully engaged in their role and had oversight of the day to day running of the home.

There was limited information for people to support their understanding. We have made a recommendation concerning this.

Rotas showed there was enough staff at the home to support people safely. Practices relating to medication storage and administration were safe. Staff were able to describe the course of action they would take if they felt anyone was at risk of harm or abuse this included ‘whistleblowing’ to external organisations. The registered manager had systems and processes in place to ensure that staff who worked at the service were recruited safely. Risks were well assessed and information was updated as and when required. We were able to view these procedures and how they worked.

All newly appointed staff were enrolled on a work based induction when they took up post at the home. Records showed that all staff training was in date. There was a supervision schedule in place, all staff had received up to date supervisions and most had undergone an annual appraisal, any due were booked in to take place.

We saw that where people could consent to decisions regarding their care and support this had been documented. Where people lacked capacity, the appropriate best interest processes had been followed. The service was working in accordance with the Mental Capacity and DoLS (Deprivation of Liberty) and associated principles. There was currently no one assessed as needing a DoLs.

The environment was pleasant and homely. There was limited consideration given to support people who were living with dementia. some additional attention would be encouraged in relation to the environment, this would improve the overall environment and support independence. We raised this at the time of our inspection.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the staff, the registered manager and the service in general. People and relatives told us they liked the staff who supported them. Staff were able to give us examples of how they preserved dignity and privacy when providing care and we observed staff treating people with kindness and dignity throughout the day.

There had been no complaints received for Park House. However, the complaints process was well managed and documented in accordance with the provider’s complaints policy. The complaints policy contained contact details for the local authorities and Local Government Ombudsman if people wished to escalate their complaint.

Care plans contained information about people’s likes, dislikes, preferences, backgrounds and personalities. People's diverse needs were respected.

Regular audits were taking place for different aspects of service delivery. Quality assurance systems were effective and measured service provision. Action plans were drawn up when areas of improvement were identified. Staff meetings and resident meetings took place. We saw however two notifications had not been reported to CQC in line with requirement. We discussed this at the time of our inspection and found it was an oversight on the registered managers behalf.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.