We carried out a review of the data available to us about Parkside on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Parkside, you can give feedback on this service.
Parkside is a residential care home, providing care and support to older people living with a variety of health conditions. At the time of the inspection, 29 people were living at the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People, relatives and staff said people’s needs were met by the service in a caring and person-centred way. Everyone shared many positive comments about the service. People were happy to live there, and relatives always felt welcomed and included. One relative who continued to visit regularly when their relative was no longer there summed it up when they said, “I visit most days and it’s nice to have that in my life. I can still see and talk to people I used to when I visited [person]. They looked after [person] well and they still look after me. I’m still part of the family here.”
People were protected from harm by staff who were confident in recognising and reporting concerns. People were safe because potential risks to their health and wellbeing had been managed well. There were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported well to take their medicines. Lessons were learnt from incidents to prevent recurrence. Staff followed effective processes to prevent the spread of infections.
Staff were trained well to have the right skills and knowledge to meet people's needs effectively. Staff had the information they required to meet people’s assessed needs. People had been supported to have enough to eat and drink. People had access to healthcare services when required. This helped them to maintain their health and well-being.
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. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff supported people in a way that respected and promoted their privacy and dignity. They encouraged people to be as independent as possible.
Staff were responsive to people’s changing needs. Complaints were managed well and there was learning from these to improve the quality of care. The service provided good end of life care when required. Further work was necessary to ensure where possible, people's end of life care wishes were included in their care plans.
The provider had effective quality monitoring processes to continually assess the quality of the service. They used feedback from people, staff, relatives and other stakeholders to improve the service. The registered manager and staff were proud of the work they did to help people to live happy and fulfilled lives.
Rating at last inspection:
The last rating for this service was Good (published 10 December 2016).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Parkside is a residential care home which accommodates up to 31 older people. On the day of our visit there were 28 people using the service.
There was 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 felt safe living at the service. It was evident from talking with staff that they were aware of what they considered to be abuse and how to report this. Staff knew how to use risk assessments to keep people safe, alongside supporting them to be as independent as possible. Staff numbers were based upon people’s dependency levels and were flexible if people’s needs changed. Staff had been recruited using a robust process, with effective recruitment checks completed. Systems were in place to ensure that medicines were stored, administered and handled safely.
Staff were knowledgeable about the specific needs of the people in their care because they had received appropriate training and support. New staff had undertaken the provider's induction programme and training to allow them to support people confidently. People were supported to make choices around their care and daily lives. Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when assisting people. Staff always gained consent before supporting people. There were policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff knew how to use them to protect people who were unable to make decisions for themselves.
People were given the opportunity to make choices about their food and drink and were provided with support to eat and drink, where this was needed. People had access to health and social care professionals when they needed, and prompt action had been taken in response to illness or changes in people’s physical and mental health.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff, and spending time with them on activities of their choice. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions and planning their care, and their views were listened to and acted upon. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. Care records were reflective of people's current needs and were reviewed and evaluated on a regular basis.
People were supported to engage in a variety of activities, based upon their preferences. The service had a complaints procedure in place to ensure that people and their families were able to provide feedback about their care and to help the service make improvements where required. The service had a complaints procedure in place to ensure that people and their families were able to provide feedback about their care and to help the service make improvements where required.
People were complimentary about the registered manager and staff. It was obvious from our observations that staff, people who used the service and the registered manager had good relationships. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvements. Staff were well supported and motivated to do a good job. The registered manager and senior staff consistently monitored and reviewed the quality of care people received and encouraged feedback from people and their representatives, to identify, plan and make improvements to the service.
We undertook this focused inspection on 15 March 2016 to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Parkside on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
During our previous inspection on 26 November 2016, we found that people did not feel that staff were readily available when they needed them and there were not established systems in place to manage the allocation of staff around the service, particularly at busy periods. The service also had to regularly rely on agency staff members, whom people were not always familiar with.
During that inspection we also found that the provider had failed to operate an effective complaints and feedback procedure. People did not feel comfortable raising complaints about the care that they received and were not confident that their concerns would be taken seriously.
We asked the provider to submit an action plan to tell us how they would meet these regulations in the future; they stated that they would be meeting them by 29 February 2016. During this inspection we returned to see if the service had made the improvements they stated in their action plan. We found that the provider was now meeting these regulations.
Parkside is registered to provide accommodation to people who require personal care for up to 31 older people, who may also be living with dementia. It is situated in a residential area of Kempston, which is close to Bedford. On the day of our inspection there were 27 people receiving care from the service.
The service 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.
Improvements had been made to staffing at the service. The registered manager had analysed where and when staff were most needed, and re-distributed staff members accordingly. In addition, recruitment had taken place to reduce the amount of agency staff required by the service.
There had also been improvements to the feedback systems in place at the service. People were encouraged to raise comments or complaints and felt they would be taken seriously. Meetings were regularly held with people to encourage them to provide feedback and staff had been re-trained so that they encouraged and acted upon feedback when received.
Parkside is a care home providing personal care and support for up to 31 older people, who may also be living with dementia. It is situated in Kempston, which is close to Bedford. On the day of our inspection there were 30 people living at the service, with one bedroom being used for respite services.
The inspection took place 26 November 2015.
The service 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 did not always feel safe at the service. Staffing levels at the service were not always sufficient to meet people’s needs and the service regularly relied on agency staffing. This meant that people often had to wait to have call bells answered and weren’t always comfortable with the staff caring for them.
People were not always treated with dignity and respect by staff. There were not always positive relationships between people and members of staff, and people reported that they were not always treated in a caring way.
Complaints and feedback from people was not always managed appropriately. People were not always comfortable raising issues with the care that they received and didn’t have confidence that they would be addressed if they did. This meant that there was not an open environment at the service.
People did not feel that all staff members demonstrated that they had the skills and knowledge they needed, to provide them with the care they required. Feedback from staff and their records showed that they did receive regular training and support from management and the provider.
There had been concerns raised regarding the food at the service from people and their family members. The service was aware of these concerns and was taking action to address them.
Staff had received training on abuse, and were aware of how to protect people from it. If they suspected abuse, they had an understanding of reporting procedures and were confident to report to the registered manager, or higher if necessary.
Risk assessments had been completed for people to identify areas of risk, and to put controls in place to minimise the impact of those risks. General risks to staff, visitors and the service were also carried out.
People’s medication was administered safely by trained staff. There were systems in place to ensure medication was accurately recorded and monitored.
People were supported to book and attend healthcare appointments where necessary. Healthcare professionals visited the service on a regular basis, including a weekly GP’s surgery held at the service.
Care plans were written with input from people and their family members, to ensure they were an accurate reflection of people’s care needs and wishes. People’s consent to care was sought, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was used appropriately where necessary.
Care was personalised to meet people’s specific needs and was regularly reviewed, with their input, to ensure care plans were accurate.
Staff were positive about their roles and were well supported by the registered manager.
The provider and registered manager carried out a number of quality assurance processes, to monitor the care that was being delivered and to highlight areas for improvement.
We identified that the provider was not meeting regulatory requirements and was in breach of a number of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.