Park House Rest Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective and achieved desired outcomes by assessing and reviewing health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them, fully involving them consistently.

The care plans reviewed demonstrated an excellent standard of person‑centred practice, with strong evidence the service knew people well and maintained records which supported safe, dignified, and personalised care. Across all the plans scrutinised there was a consistent approach to documenting preferences, needs, risks, and decision‑making arrangements.

There was clear evidence the service prioritised personalisation across all people’s care plans. They captured routines, preferences, communication needs, and independence in rich detail, illustrating staff understood not only what support was required but how people wished support to be delivered. Morning and evening routines, independence in mobility, and preferences for calm communication were all described in a way which directly guided staff practice. Spending time with and speaking to people whose care plans were reviewed revealed they were accurate and helped guide staff well.

Plans placed strong emphasis on independence, choice, and past experiences, including a sensitive acknowledgement of historical issues, ensuring staff approached people with awareness and respect.

All plans reviewed contained detailed information on risks, medical needs, medicines, consents, communication preferences, and social support arrangements. Monthly updates were clearly recorded, with changes highlighted at the top of sections. This provided transparency and ensured staff could quickly identify what had changed since the last review. The system also appeared to have effective review prompts in place.

The plans emphasised maintaining privacy during personal care, obtaining consent, involving people in decisions, and ensuring communication is tailored to individual needs.

The plans consistently highlighted the importance of meaningful activities and social connections. People’s hobbies and interests were recorded, with guidance such as which resources should be made available and staff should encourage participation while respecting choice. Emotional wellbeing was considered thoughtfully—such as a person’s preference for one-to-one‑ support when anxious.

Overall, the care plans provided very strong evidence of a person-centred‑, safety aware‑, and well organised‑ service. Documentation was thorough, regularly updated, and reflective of people’s individuality and rights. Staff were given clear, practical guidance tailored to each person, supporting high-quality‑ and compassionate care. This clearly contributed to the excellent feedback received about staff as people said they felt the team understood their preferences well. This would not have been possible without excellent care plans.

Talking to people at the service as well as relatives revealed the approach was consistent, with a high awareness of how people had been involved in their care planning and reviews. The service therefore demonstrated it knew people well, leading to high rates of satisfaction and observed quality of life. “Thank you” cards were displayed in the foyer, as well as around the home.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.