You are here

Parkside Nursing Home Inadequate

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 November 2019

About the service

Parkside Nursing Home is a care home that provides personal care and nursing for up to 50 people in one purpose-built building. At the time of the inspection 46 people lived at the home.

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

Although many people told us they felt safe at Parkside, this was not reflected in our findings.

People were not protected from abusive practices, concerns had not always been reported and investigated and action had not been taken to keep people safe. Risks associated with people’s care and support were not managed safely. Measures were not always in place to reduce risks such as choking, falls and pressure ulcers. This placed people at risk of harm.

There were not always enough staff to meet people’s needs and ensure their safety. Furthermore, staff did not all know how to provide safe care. Consequently, their actions placed people at risk of harm. Medicines were not managed safely and the come was not clean and hygienic in all areas. Safe recruitment practices were followed.

People were at risk of inconsistent and unsafe care as their needs had not always been fully assessed and planned for. People’s health needs were not managed safely or effectively. Good practice guidance and advice from specialist health professionals was not always followed.

People were not always supported by competent staff. Although staff had received training they did not always implement learning in areas such as safeguarding and behaviour management. Risks associated with eating and drinking were not managed safely and people’s feedback about the food was mixed.

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. Support was provided against people’s wishes and when people lacked capacity to make decisions there was no evidence that staff were providing support in the least restrictive way.

There was not a culture of person-centred care at the home. People were not provided with consistently kind and caring support, they were not always given choices or consulted with about their care. Staff did not always support people in a dignified way and aspects of the environment meant staff could not ensure their privacy. Staff did not always communicate with people in a respectful manner and were not always responsive to people’s distress.

People were not consistently provided with support that met their needs and preferences and people told us there were not always enough staff available to respond to their requests for support. People were not consistently provided with compassionate care at the end of their lives, care in the dedicate end of life unit was poor. People could not be assured concerns and complaints would be addressed. People were supported to keep in touch with their family and friends and had some opportunity for social activity.

The home was not well led. There was blame culture at the home and a lack of accountability for issues found. Although the registered manager was experienced and had a clear understanding of their role, they had not ensured the home was run safely or effectively. People’s health and safety was risk due a failure to identify and address issues and due to poor practices by senior staff at the home. There was a lack of clinical governance and care documentation had been falsified.

Although we found that the service worked with partner agencies, people’s feedback about working relationships was poor. Morale in the staff team was low, there was a culture of mistrust and this had a negative impact on the care people received.

The service met the characteristics of Inadequate in most areas. For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was

Inspection areas



Updated 26 November 2019

The service was not safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 26 November 2019

The service was not effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 26 November 2019

The service was not caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 26 November 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 26 November 2019

The service was not well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.