• Care Home
  • Care home

Park House Care Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

50 Park Road, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4QE (01933) 443883

Provided and run by:
Four Seasons Homes No.4 Limited

All Inspections

4 April 2023

During a routine inspection

About the service

Park House Care Home is a residential and nursing care home providing personal and nursing care to 24 people at the time of our inspection. Park House Care Home accommodates up to 42 people in one purpose built building.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People’s care and support had been impacted by a sustained period of management instability including several changes of manager since the last inspection. All aspects of the running and oversight of the service had been affected. Communication by staff was not always effective internally and with other agencies, which impacted upon people's care and raised the risk of unsafe care. Gaps and inconsistencies in care records and quality assurance checks required improvements to be made, embedded and sustained over time.

People were at heightened risk of receiving inconsistent care or care which did not meet their needs when they showed distress as care planning processes and management oversight of records were not always effective. Some safety risks were not addressed promptly.

Staff were able to meet people’s basic care needs but deployment of staff was not always effective. We received a lot of feedback from staff that there were often not enough staff on shift. We have recommended the provider keeps staffing deployment and levels under regular review.

People and their relatives were not routinely involved in reviewing people's care to ensure they had choice and control as their needs and preferences changed. We have made a recommendation to the provider they implement best practice in care planning and review processes.

Information about people's eating and drinking needs was not always shared promptly with kitchen staff which raised the risk of unsafe care. Where required, people received physical assistance with their eating and drinking to ensure their dietary requirements were met.

Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to maintain people's health, although sometimes arranging appointments was not always prompt. The service was spacious and clean, although the décor was tired and in need of renewal in some areas.

MCA assessments and best interest decisions were undertaken but not always reviewed. The provider was already aware of this and making improvements in this area. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice and ongoing improvements to documentation were in progress.

Personalised care plans were in place but not always up to date. Staff knew people well and had built positive, professional relationships with them.

People's communication needs were not always well assessed and at times were not fully met. Throughout the inspection we saw staff communicate and interact warmly with people. Activities staff supported people do things they enjoyed.

End of life care planning was not always well considered during care planning processes. Staff received training in this aspect of care so people could receive compassionate support as they approach the end of their life.

People were cared for safely. Risk assessments were completed and reviewed regularly and as people’s needs changed. Staff understood safeguarding procedures. Safe recruitment practices were followed to ensure staff were suitable for their roles.

People were supported with their medicines and good infection control practices were followed.

Accidents, incidents and falls were recorded and followed up. Additional analysis to spot any themes or measures to reduce the risk of recurrence was going to be introduced.

Pre-assessments were completed before people moved into the service. Staff received training to meet people's needs. The provider was arranging training in further topics relevant to staff roles. Processes to ensure staff received one to one supervision to discuss their roles and development had been improved.

People were well treated and supported by staff. Staff were observed to be compassionate and caring in their interactions with people. Staff maintained people’s privacy and dignity. Consent was sought before care was delivered.

Meetings took place and surveys were used to gather feedback.

A new manager was in post and regional support managers also supported the staff team. The provider had a service improvement plan and was aware of all the key areas which required improvements.

The provider and staff worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals. They were supportive of the inspection process and working hard to make and sustain improvements.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 24 March 2020) and there were breaches of regulation in the areas of safe care and treatment, dignity and respect, and governance arrangements. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made to people receiving care with dignity and respect. We found a continued breach in relation to people's safe care and treatment, and good governance of the service.

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about people receiving poor care, and also due to a review of information we held about the service. A decision was made for us to complete a full inspection to look at all aspects of the service.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Park House Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified a continued breach in relation to people's safe care and treatment, and governance arrangements in the service.

We have also made some recommendations to the provider. We have recommended they keep staffing levels under regular review and implement best practice in care planning and review processes.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

30 January 2020

During a routine inspection

About the service

Park House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 36 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 42 people in one purpose built facility.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were not always treated with dignity and respect. Staff were task focussed and did not always put people first.

Risk assessments and care plans didn't always contain up to date, clear information about people's current risks. Staff did not act in accordance with measures put in place to manage risk.

Systems and processes in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service were ineffective. The registered manager had not identified or acted on the issues we found during inspection.

Relatives spoke positively about staff and management. Relatives told us people were safe and they were protected by staff who understood their responsibilities and how to keep people safe.

Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there were enough staff available to meet people's needs. Staff received comprehensive training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. Staff were happy working for the service and felt supported by the registered manager and colleagues.

The home was well equipped, clean and tidy and good infection control practices were being followed. Further work was being considered to make the home more suited to people living with dementia.

People took part in activities they enjoyed and plans were in place to expand the range and times that activities were available. Visitors were welcomed. The home had good relationships with health and social care professionals.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning and delivery of their care, and were asked for feedback which was acted upon appropriately.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The provider was keen to work in partnership with key organisations including the local authority to improve the service for people. Staff at the service worked with healthcare professionals to ensure good outcomes for people.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 9 August 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to safety, dignity and respect, and governance of the service.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

19 June 2017

During a routine inspection

Park House Care Home provides accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care for up to 42 older people, some of whom have a diagnosis of dementia. At the time of the inspection 41 people were using the service.

At the last inspection on the 29 April and 5 May 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found that the service remained Good.

A registered manager was 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.

Systems were in place to identify and manage risks to people’s health and welfare. However some people cared for in bed were not always repositioned at the frequency set out in their turn charts. This increased their risks of developing pressure ulcers.

Systems were in place to keep the service safe, clean and hygienic.

Staff knew how to respond to any concerns or incidents of abuse to protect people. People’s dependency levels were regularly assessed to ensure that the appropriate number of staff available. The service’s recruitment process ensured that staff were suitably employed. Systems were in place to ensure medicines were safely managed and people received them safely.

Staff received appropriate support and training to perform their roles and responsibilities. They were provided with on-going training to update their skills and knowledge.

People’s consent to care and treatment was sought in line with current legislation. Where people’s liberty was deprived, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had been submitted and approved by the statutory body.

People were provided with a balanced diet and adequate amounts of food and drinks of their choice and supported to access health care facilities when required.

People were looked after by staff that were caring, compassionate and promoted their privacy and dignity. People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. The service responded to complaints within the agreed timescale.

The service promoted a culture that was open and transparent. Quality assurance systems were in place to obtain feedback, monitor performance and manage risks.

29 April and 5 May 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 29 April and 5 May 2015.

Park House Care Home provides personal and nursing care for up to 42 older people who are physically and mentally frail some of whom may be living with dementia. There were 41 people living at the service when we visited.

The home has a registered manager. 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.

People were looked after by staff who knew how to respond to allegations or incidents of abuse.

People’s dependency levels were regularly assessed to enable the appropriate number of staff to be available on duty. The service’s recruitment process ensured that staff were suitably employed.

People received their medicines at the prescribed times.

Staff received appropriate support and training to perform their roles and responsibilities. They were provided with on-going training to update their skills and knowledge.

People’s consent to care and treatment was sought in line with current legislation. Where people’s liberty was deprived, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications had been submitted and approved by the statutory body.

People were provided with a balanced diet and adequate amounts of food and drinks of their choice. If required people had access to health care facilities.

People were looked after by staff who were caring, compassionate and promoted their privacy and dignity.

People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. The service responded to complaints within the agreed timescale.

The service promoted a culture that was open and transparent. Quality assurance systems were in place to obtain feedback, monitor performance and manage risks.

20 June 2013

During a routine inspection

People who used the service told us that they liked living at the home. A person who used the service we spoke with told us "The staff are really good, in fact fantastic." Another person said " I am really happy here, we had a quiz night and all the staff came."

A relative said "It was hard to have to place XXX in a home but this has been really good for him, he has perked up quite a lot since being here."

We found the home to be compliant in the regulations we examined against.

4 January 2013

During a routine inspection

During our visit people told us that staff treated them with respect and encouraged them to make choices about their day to day life. People told us, and we heard, staff speak with them in a kind and respectful manner. A visitor we spoke with explained how the manager was always available and the staff were very good. One person who used the service told us, " the staff and management are fantastic they are so supportive and always laughing and cheerful, they keep me going." Another person who spoke with us said " staff are absolutely brilliant they work so hard, it is really nice with a lovely atmosphere"

We found that the home was a safe and caring environment for the people who used the service.

11 November 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

There were 41 residents living at the service when we visited on 11 November 2011. We spoke with five residents, one relative and three staff to ask for their comments and observations. We spent an hour in a communal area of the home with residents, observing their experience of care and assessing the quality of support residents received.

Residents told us they felt involved in making decisions about their care and support and the staff were very polite and friendly and would always try to respond to their requests. One resident said she liked to keep her independence by cleaning her own room and helping staff to raise money by selling raffle tickets. Another resident told us she never had any reason to complain about her care. Two residents said that they were happy and had no concerns with the staff, for example one told us, 'The staff are brilliant'.