Stanley Park

Updated 8 October 2025

Date of assessment: 20 January to 2 February 2026.

Stanley Park is a care home providing accommodation, personal and nursing care to a maximum of 71 older people and younger people, including people who may live with dementia. At the time of our unannounced visit, 60 people were using the service.

A registered manager was in place. The registered manager is registered with the Care Quality Commission and is legally responsible to ensure that the service is compliant with legal and regulatory requirements.

At our last inspection, we identified a breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance. At this inspection, improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Stanley Park was well-led. There was a happy, welcoming atmosphere around the home. A new registered manager had been appointed since the last inspection. The new registered manager and provider had introduced improvements to the service, including to the environment and staffing levels to help ensure people received more person-centred care. Improvements had been made to the environment, it had been refurbished and had a very good standard of hygiene. It was well-designed with more communal areas for people including for people who may live with dementia, or a dementia-related condition to keep people engaged and stimulated. A café had been created, and this was observed to be a hub of activity for people and relatives. Three activities co-ordinators were employed to help ensure people were supported to experience a range of meaningful activities and entertainment.

Relatives and professionals described how people received personalised care and support that was people centred and tailored to people’s individual needs and preferences. Staff showed a respect for people's diversity, valuing everyone’s unique identity and needs. The staff team knew people very well and provided support discreetly and with compassion. People’s privacy was respected, and people were supported to maintain contact with relatives and friends.

The culture of the service was friendly, open and transparent. People's and staff voices were heard to continually improve the quality of care. People, relatives and staff were confident about approaching the registered manager if they needed to. They recognised their views and feedback were valued and respected and used to support quality service development. The registered manager and provider were continually developing the service to meet and maximise people's outcomes. Effective auditing systems were in place.

The home was very well-maintained, and systems were in place to manage the environment safely. The home was clean, and staff were aware of infection prevention measures. Medicines were managed.

Records provided detailed guidance to ensure people received safe, consistent, person-centred care and support. Equipment was available to meet people’s needs and to help maintain their independence. People’s mental capacity and ability to consent was taken into account, and people and their representatives were involved in planning their care and support. Where people needed continuous supervision to maintain their safety, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications were appropriately submitted.

Staff were valued, they were encouraged to speak up and give feedback. There were sufficient trained staff who worked well with other professionals to ensure people's needs were met safely. Staff received training around a range of topics to help ensure they were competent to carry out their role to ensure people’s care and safety. There was robust recruitment of new staff.

Updated 8 October 2025

People and relatives were complimentary about how staff supported people to continue to enjoy a good quality of life. People told us staff were caring, kind and supportive. Their comments included, “Staff are kind and patient”, “Staff do spend time with me” and “Staff let me know what is happening.” Relatives also found staff were kind and respectful. Their comments included, “The staff are really caring and thoughtful, they also comfort me”, “I think the care is impressive” and “It is a lovely place, the atmosphere is fantastic and the staff are brilliant.”

People experienced a positive, relaxed, open culture that was compassionate and caring. A relative commented, “The ethos is just enjoy being here.” Another relative told us, “We looked at different homes, we chose this one, as it is the right place for [Name], staff have the knowledge and the home is comfortable.” We observed warm, respectful interactions between people and staff, delivered with humour and appropriate touch throughout the inspection. A relative commented, “The facilities are very good, there is lots of space, that helps the atmosphere.” There was a varied programme of activities and entertainment. Peoples and relatives’ comments included, “I went to see Fenwick’s Christmas window”, “There is loads going on, they were making chocolates last week” and “Entertainers come in regularly.”

People were supported to make choices and were involved in decision making about their care and support. A person told us, “I make all my own choices.” Relatives told us they felt listened to and consulted when planning and agreeing how care and support should be provided. A relative commented, “We had a review and discussed about [Name] and how they were settled.” Staff supported people to have a full and active life in line with their preferences and choices about how they liked to spend their time. A person commented, “Staff took me shopping. You do what you want.”

People’s health and care and treatment needs were met, with the involvement of appropriate professionals where needed. A relative commented, “[Name] is well looked after here, the doctor comes.” People felt able to complain and were confident action would be taken, and improvements would be made. A relative told us, “I would speak to the manager if I needed to, they are very approachable, I always see them around.”