Bingley Park Care Home

Updated 23 March 2026

Assessment dates were 9 March 2026 to 20 March 2026, with site visit dates on 9 and 10 March 2026. Bingley Park Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 72 adults, some of whom may be living with dementia or have a sensory impairment or a physical disability. At the time of the assessment, the service was supporting 37 people. The service is currently unrated, first registered October 2024. This is a fully comprehensive assessment, covering all quality statements.

The service promotes a positive learning culture and has robust systems and processes in place regarding safeguarding and safe staffing. The service controls and maintains the risks in relation to the environment, and infection, prevention control (IPC). Medicines were safely managed within the service, with appropriate policies and procedures in place. Staff had completed appropriate training to support with safe care, such as safeguarding training.

There are robust systems in place for assessment of people’s needs and monitoring and improving outcomes, such as a regular audits completed by leaders within the service. People were supported to live healthier lives by regularly exercising or attending community activities. People were provided with consent documentation and were asked by staff for consent before support was provided, with an embedded understanding of appropriate legislation such as The Mental Capacity Act (2005), (MCA, 2005). However, monitoring of people’s outcomes was not always effective. There was at times incorrect information in care documentation, and people or their relatives, were not clear on how often care should be reviewed.

We observed staff demonstrated kindness, compassion and dignity towards people. People were treated as individuals, having care plans tailored to their specific needs, likes and preferences. Staff knew people well and were responsive to people’s immediate needs to reduce distress. There were mixed responses from staff regarding workforce wellbeing. The service has advised us how they plan to make improvements in this area.

People’s care plan documentation was person centred, and bedrooms were well personalised. People were provided with information, which was important to their care, as well as information about how to raise concerns, such as safeguarding. People were involved in care planning and reviews and had equal access to services, such as community activities, including those who are at risk of inequality in line with appropriately legislation such as the Equality Act (2010), (EA, 2010). There was documentation in place which supported discussions for planning for the future, including end of life planning.

The service had a clear, shared vision which was embedded throughout by leaders. There were robust systems and processes in place which reflected capable and inclusive leadership, such as regular audits and oversight, good governance, supervision and team meetings. However, there were some instances where incorrect information was not identified by leaders in the service. People and staff, we spoke with, felt able to speak up to leaders about any concerns they had, and felt confident concerns would be dealt with appropriately. However, recent staff surveys reflected staff felt unable to approach leaders. The service worked well with other agencies through partnership working such as health and local authority services. There were mechanisms to support learning, improvement and innovation within the service, such as staff surveys and service improvement plans. Oversight was also in place from the services provider Tanglewood Ltd, to support with driving improvements.

Updated 23 March 2026

People felt safe in the service and showed confidence in staff to support them with their care, including the safe management of medicines, and involving the right people to manage risks. Most people we spoke with felt staff were well trained, however, some relatives felt there could be improvements in dementia care. People and their relatives told us the environment was safe and the service reduced the risks of infection. One person told us, “When the staff are carrying out personal care, they [staff] always have an apron on and, depending on what they are doing, gloves as well.”

People told us they were regularly involved in care plan reviews and were kept up to date with any changes regarding their care. One relative told us, “We have been involved with [relatives] care plan and have copies.” People and their relatives told us consent was requested before care interventions were carried out.

The service displayed values of caring towards the people they supported, as well as promoting people’s independence. One relative told us, “Before [my relative] came here, they didn’t do very much at all but here the staff encourage them to try and do things.” People were supported with their individual likes and preferences and had timely responses from staff to meet their immediate needs.

People and their relatives told us their care was person centred and they were given information to support decision making upon assessment. People’s cultural or religious needs had been considered and there were discussions with relatives for planning for the future.

Both people and their relatives felt the senior staff were good, but no one could name the manager. However, people and their relatives told us if they had concerns, they would feel confident voicing these to leaders in the service. People told us they were given the opportunity to provide feedback on care in residents meetings.