You are here


Inspection carried out on 24 January 2018

During a routine inspection

Parkhill Lodge is a care home providing residential care to people with learning disabilities. 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 service is situated on the outskirts of Maltby, with some local facilities, such as shops and pubs, nearby. The home can accommodate up to 22 people. At the time of the inspection 20 people were living at the home.

At the last inspection, in November 2015 the service was rated ‘Good’ across each of the five key questions. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Park Hill Lodge’ on our website at’. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. However, improvements were required regarding areas such as updating policies and procedures and making sure shortfalls found when checks were made were addressed in a timely manner.

The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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. As the manager was also registered for two other council care homes they were supported by a deputy manager, who organised the day to day running of Parkhill Lodge.

We found the service continued to assess, plan for and meet people’s individual and changing needs, and people were involved in making decisions about their care and support.

Staff had a clear understanding of safeguarding people, and care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people were safe, without restricting their freedom. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service continued to provide safe care. Staffing arrangements had been recently adjusted to ensure there were sufficient numbers of staff available to keep people safe and the staff recruitment process continued to be robust.

Staff were trained and supported to develop their skills and provide people with the standard of care they required.

Medication was managed safely and administered by staff who had completed appropriate training.

People were supported to receive a healthy diet and they had access to relevant healthcare services when they needed to.

People's privacy, dignity and independence were maintained by staff who were caring and respectful, and knew the people they supported very well. Care and support was delivered in a person centred way that focussed on meeting each person’s individual needs, aims and aspirations.

There were systems in place to continuously assess and monitor the quality of the service. This included obtaining people’s views and checking staff were following the correct procedures.

There were areas of the home that needed attention. Checks carried out had identified these and actions plans formulated, but timescales were not provided due to the future of the service being under consideration. However, urgent shortfalls were being addressed and there had been no negative impact on people living at the home.

Policies, procedures and other information used to inform people using the service and staff about how it intended to operate had not been reviewed regularly to ensure they were up to date.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection carried out on 10 & 13 November 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 10 and 13 November 2015 and was unannounced on the first day. The home was previously inspected in January 2014 and the service was meeting the regulations we looked at.

Parkhill Lodge is a care home for people with learning disabilities. It can accommodate up to 22 people. The service is situated in Maltby, near Rotherham. At the time of our inspection there were 20 people living at the service and one person receiving respite care.

The home had 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 we spoke with told us the service provided good care and support. They told us they felt safe, the staff were caring, kind and respected their choices and decisions.

Medicines were stored safely and procedures were in place to ensure medicines were administered safely. Although some minor issues had been identified due to a change in systems and pharmacy.

We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The staff we spoke with had a good understanding and knowledge of this and the registered manager was in the process of assessing people who used the service to determine if an application for a DoLS was required.

People were involved in menu planning and meal preparation. We saw people we able to choose what they wanted to eat and who they sat with. There was plenty of choice. People had access to drinks and snacks as they wanted them.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and spoke to people with understanding, warmth and respect.

People’s needs had been identified, and from talking to people and observing staff supporting people, we found people’s needs were met by staff who knew them well. Care records we saw detailed people’s needs and people had been involved in their care planning.

There was a robust recruitment system and all staff had completed an induction. Staff had received formal supervision and annual appraisals of their work performance.

There were systems in place for monitoring quality, which were effective. Where improvements were needed, these were addressed and followed up to ensure continuous improvement.

The service had not received any complaints since our last inspection, however, the registered manager was aware of how to respond to complaints. Information on how to report complaints was clearly displayed in the service.

Staff and people who used the service who we spoke with told us that all staff were approachable, the registered manager operated an ‘open door’ policy and the service was well led.

Inspection carried out on 17 January 2014

During a routine inspection

The home is a 22 bedded facility for the residential care for people with a learning disability.

There were 21 people living in the home at the time of the inspection, with eight people actually present whilst we were there. The other 13 people were undertaking activities outside of the home.

The home was clean and well maintained. The home had effective systems and processes in place in relation to the management of the care of the people living in the home and staff management, but maintained a very homely atmosphere.

The interactions between the staff and the people living in the home were warm and respectful. Both staff and people living in the home described the home as "good" or "lovely". One staff member told us it was a 'lovely home' and "its like being at home". One person told us that she "always looked forward to coming to work". One person living in the home told us that the home was "a noisy home where we have lots of fun", while another told us simply that "I'm happy here".

Inspection carried out on 6 July 2012

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with were positive about their experience of receiving services at Parkhill Lodge. One person we spoke with told us �I like my room, I picked everything in it�. Another person told us there were lots of activities to take part in. We spoke with one person who said �I like the staff, they are nice�. We observed that people received care and support from staff who treated them with respect, and took time to ensure that people�s preferences and needs were understood.

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