You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 14 April 2016

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection, carried out on 14 April 2016.

Parkside Care Home is a residential care home in St. Helens. The service offers accommodation and support for up to 30 older people. There were 26 people living at the service on the day we visited. The building is arranged across two floors with lift, staircase and stair lift access to the upper floor. There are 24 single rooms and three shared rooms. Twenty one rooms have ensuite facilities. Car parking is available at the front of the building.

The registered manager had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since January 2011. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The last inspection of Parkside Care Home was carried out in November 2015 and we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The registered provider had not met the requirements of Regulation 9 Person centred care and Regulation 12 Safe care and treatment and had been served a warning notice for Regulation 17 Good governance. The registered provider developed action plans to address all areas highlighted and these had all been actioned by the day we visited.

People who used the service said they felt safe. Staff knew about the systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm and they also knew how to recognise and respond to allegations of abuse appropriately.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the needs of people were met. Effective recruitment processes were in place and were followed by the service. Staff received on-going training and support to ensure they carried out their role effectively.

Medicines were managed safely and processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. People received care and support from staff that knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s individual needs. People told us staff always treated them well and promoted their choices regarding their care and support. People spoke positively about staff, their comments included, “Staff are supportive and helpful” and “Staff are excellent”.

People’s risks were anticipated, identified and monitored. Staff managed risk effectively and supported people’s decisions, so they had as much control and independence as possible.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We saw that there were policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and DoLS to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected.

People had enough to eat and drink. People were offered drinks and snacks throughout the day. People who were at risk of poor nourishment were regularly weighed. This ensured people’s health and well-being was closely monitored and any changes were responded too.

Staff were patient and friendly and knew people well. Staff interacted well with people and engaged in conversation about things of interest to them.

People’s care and support needs were up to date and reviewed on a regular basis with the person or other appropriate people. Individualised care plans had been developed since the last inspection in November 2015. Staff provided people with person centred care and support.

People were aware of how to make a complaint if required and they told us they would not be worried about complaining if they needed to. People were confident that their complaints would be listened to and acted upon. Complaints reviewed had been followed in accordance with the registered providers policy and procedure.

Systems were in place to regularly check the quality of the service provided and to ensure improvements to the service were made. The registered manager and staff established good working relationships with family members and visiting professionals to the benefit of people who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 5 November 2015

During a routine inspection

This was an unannounced inspection, carried out on 14 April 2016.

Parkside Care Home is a residential care home in St. Helens. The service offers accommodation and support for up to 30 older people. There were 26 people living at the service on the day we visited. The building is arranged across two floors with lift, staircase and stair lift access to the upper floor. There are 24 single rooms and three shared rooms. Twenty one rooms have ensuite facilities. Car parking is available at the front of the building.

The registered manager had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since January 2011. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The last inspection of Parkside Care Home was carried out in November 2015 and we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The registered provider had not met the requirements of Regulation 9 Person centred care and Regulation 12 Safe care and treatment and had been served a warning notice for Regulation 17 Good governance. The registered provider developed action plans to address all areas highlighted and these had all been actioned by the day we visited.

People who used the service said they felt safe. Staff knew about the systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm and they also knew how to recognise and respond to allegations of abuse appropriately.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the needs of people were met. Effective recruitment processes were in place and were followed by the service. Staff received on-going training and support to ensure they carried out their role effectively.

Medicines were managed safely and processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. People received care and support from staff that knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s individual needs. People told us staff always treated them well and promoted their choices regarding their care and support. People spoke positively about staff, their comments included, “Staff are supportive and helpful” and “Staff are excellent”.

People’s risks were anticipated, identified and monitored. Staff managed risk effectively and supported people’s decisions, so they had as much control and independence as possible.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We saw that there were policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and DoLS to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected.

People had enough to eat and drink. People were offered drinks and snacks throughout the day. People who were at risk of poor nourishment were regularly weighed. This ensured people’s health and well-being was closely monitored and any changes were responded too.

Staff were patient and friendly and knew people well. Staff interacted well with people and engaged in conversation about things of interest to them.

People’s care and support needs were up to date and reviewed on a regular basis with the person or other appropriate people. Individualised care plans had been developed since the last inspection in November 2015. Staff provided people with person centred care and support.

People were aware of how to make a complaint if required and they told us they would not be worried about complaining if they needed to. People were confident that their complaints would be listened to and acted upon. Complaints reviewed had been followed in accordance with the registered providers policy and procedure.

Systems were in place to regularly check the quality of the service provided and to ensure improvements to the service were made. The registered manager and staff established good working relationships with family members and visiting professionals to the benefit of people who used the service.

Inspection carried out on 9, 13 December 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection, we found the home to be warm and welcoming with a pleasant atmosphere. We observed that people made their own decisions about how they wanted to spend their time and that staff provided care and support around this. For example, people got up and went to bed when they felt like it.

We spoke with four people who were living in the home about their views and experiences of Parkside. All the people we spoke with told us they were very satisfied with the care and support provided to them. One person said, “I originally came to stay here for respite care after I had been in hospital. I liked it so much I chose to come and live here.” Another person said “This is a good place to be. We have just had our Christmas party and we had a great time.”

We reviewed three people’s care records and found they contained the majority of information staff required to provide care in a way which met people’s individual needs. At the time of our inspection people received care and support from sufficient numbers of staff. A complaints system was in place within the home.

Inspection carried out on 11 July 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with six people who lived at Parkside Residential Home. People told us that they were happy living at Parkside Residential Home. We were told “I am happy here. I have a nice room.”, “I am quite satisfied” and “Staff are fine. I can’t complain about anything.”

We received one negative comment about the home and this related to the food that was served on some occasions. The manager was able to tell us about the action that she taken regarding this.

We asked people if they thought that they were treated with dignity and respect. All of the people who we asked confirmed that they were. One person was very clear about this and stated “Very much so.”

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)