Parkfield House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

The service was previously in breach of the legal regulation relating to good governance. At this assessment, the provider had made improvements. The service was no longer in breach of this legal regulation.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There was a positive and inclusive culture at the service. People living there, relatives and staff felt it was a good place. There were clear values and visions for the service. Staff were aware of these. Staff spoke positively about their experiences working there and the support of the registered manager. Their comments included, “We are all working together to ensure person-centred care”, “[Registered manager] is great and leads by example”, “We treat the residents like family. It is a community” and “I feel proud to be part of a team that genuinely cares about the residents.” The registered manager told us, “Staff are the backbone of our home. They are brilliant. They are understanding and supportive. They treat everyone in a personalised way.”

There were capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders. The registered manager was experienced, had qualifications in care management and was a registered nurse. They had a good understanding of regulatory requirements. They had worked with senior managers to help make improvements at the service and introduce positive changes.

People using the service, staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Comments from staff included, “[Registered manager] has shown genuine understanding and support. [Their] encouragement helped me remain focussed and resilient”, “I feel the manager is approachable, supportive and values staff input” and “[Registered manager} really shows us [their] dedication and kindness.” People using the service were able to speak with the registered manager when they needed. Their comments included, “The manager comes to see me regularly and we have a chat” and “The manager is easy to talk to and very approachable.”

The service was operated by 2 registered providers. Senior managers from both legal entities worked closely with the service. They carried out regular reviews and audits. They provided support and guidance.

There were systems to enable staff to speak up and share concerns about the service. The provider had improved these systems following feedback from staff. They had arranged for senior managers and the human resources to spend time at the service and speak with staff about speaking up.

There were systems for the staff to raise concerns anonymously.

Staff told us they felt confident speaking with the management team at the home and raising concerns. Their comments included, “I am happy to raise any concerns and know these will be looked at” and “The management team are supportive and approachable. I feel comfortable raising concerns with them.”

The provider supported staff to feel included and treated them with equity, taking account of their individual needs. There were suitable policies and procedures to ensure staff were well treated and did not face discrimination. These included procedures during recruitment and throughout their employment. Staff undertook a range of training to understand about equality and diversity. The provider ran monthly wellbeing sessions where staff were encouraged to discuss and celebrate their individual culture.

There were effective systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. The provider, managers and staff carried out regular audits on different aspects of the service. The provider analysed things that went wrong and developed plans to make improvements when they identified areas of concern. The provider asked for, and acted on, feedback from stakeholders.

Staff worked in partnership with external professionals to assess, monitor and meet people’s needs. They made timely referrals for additional support and followed guidance from healthcare professionals.

The service had links with community groups, nurseries and schools. People had taken part in activity programmes with schools and nurseries designed to have fun, establish relationships and promote understanding of dementia. The provider worked with a local college and took students on work placements.

The provider had systems to learn and improve the service. Since the last assessment, they had put in place measures to make improvements. The service was now meeting legal regulations.

Senior managers carried out ‘mock inspections’ and identified when they felt improvements were needed. Staff undertook a wide range of training to understand about best practice and legislation. Managers helped to embed learning through discussions during individual and team meetings.

Staff told us they felt there was a commitment to continuous improvement. A staff member commented, “[Registered manager] is always looking for ways to improve the service and to support residents and staff.”