You are here

Compass Care - South Park Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

Compass Care South Park is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The provider also operates a domiciliary care service for people who live in the Bradford area.

Compass Care South Park provides accommodation and personal care for up to 10 people with learning disabilities. The accommodation is based in two adjoining dormer bungalows close to Huddersfield town centre. There were 10 people living there at the time of the inspection. The domiciliary care service offers care to people who live in the Bradford area and there were three people using this service.

The last inspection was in September 2015 and the service was rated ‘good’ at that time. At this inspection we found there were two breaches of the regulations, in relation to people’s safe care and treatment, and good governance.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

Staff knew how to identify and report any concerns and risk management plans for individuals were detailed. However, we had concerns about the premises and some equipment; some aspects were in need of attention to ensure infection prevention measures were adequate and for people’s safety.

Staff were well supported through regular training and supervision, and there was effective teamwork and communication to meet people’s needs.

People said they enjoyed the meals, but the mealtime experience needed to be improved for people. People had individual choices, although there was limited opportunity for mealtimes to be a sociable occasion.

Staff respected people’s rights, wishes and choices and there was consultation with people about their care and support. Staff understood the legislation regarding people’s mental capacity and human rights.

People were treated with respect and staff were considerate about people’s dignity and privacy.

Care records were person centred and shared with people where possible. There was evidence of some activities, although these were not always purposeful for people when indoors. One person spent long periods in their chair and some people sat passively with nothing to do.

The service had a very visible management team who knew people well and were actively involved in their care alongside support staff. Audits of quality were in place although these were not all robust enough to identify some areas highlighted at the inspection.

There were breaches of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, regulations 12, safe care and treatment and 17, good governance.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always safe.

Risks within the environment were not always assessed thoroughly or sufficient measures put in place to keep people safe within the home.

Medicines were managed appropriately, although recording was not always clear.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed well.


Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always effective.

The environment was not fully supportive of people's mobility needs to support their independence.

Staff were supported appropriately through teamwork, training and supervision.

The organisation of mealtimes did not ensure people were fully supported to have a balanced diet that promotes healthy eating.



Updated 19 June 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were kind and patient in their approach.

Staff understood people's rights for privacy and dignity and promoted this in daily practice.

Relatives were made to feel welcome when they visited the home.


Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always responsive.

Although there was evidence activities took place from time to time, we saw some people lacked purpose and did not engage in meaningful activity within the home.

Care records were person centred and people were involved in the planning of their care and support.

The complaints procedure was known by people and relatives.


Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always well led.

Checks and audits of safety and practice were not always robustly carried out to ensure the quality of the service.

People, staff and visitors said the service was well run and the management team were very involved in people's care.

There was a culture of open communication and respect for staff.