Parklands Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

This means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not always ensure people’s needs were assessed and plans put in place to meet them. We saw care plans were not always regularly updated and at times they contained conflicting or outdated information. For example, 1 person’s skin integrity plan referred to a catheter being in place, but this was removed in June 2025 according to the persons continence plan. Despite this, staff were able to demonstrate they understood people’s care needs. One staff member said, “We also have morning meetings and handovers to make sure any information is shared with the team.” Staff told us they could easily access people’s care plans. Following the inspection the manager responded to our feedback by updating people’s care plans to address the outdated and conflicting information. We will check these changes have been effective at our next assessment.

People’s care and support needs were not always based on good practice standards. For example, 1 person’s care plan indicated they required monitoring of their fluid intake. However, there was no set target or safe limit for this person’s fluid intake. This meant their fluid intake could not be monitored effectively. Following our inspection, the provider informed us they had taken action to address this, and an agreed target/safe limit was now in place. We will check this has been effective at our next assessment. People told us their dietary needs were met, and they liked the food that was on offer. One person told us, “They know that I am vegetarian, they give me vegetarian food.” A relative told us how people were able to access fluids as required. They said, “There are always jugs of juice available in the communal areas. So, residents can help themselves if they need to.” Staff were observed offering choices, following guidance and ensuring people’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. Staff were able to provide examples of how they monitored people's health regularly, such as people’s hydration and nutrition.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. People attended health appointments as and when needed. Relatives told us the staff worked well together, and the provider worked in partnership with other health professionals such as doctors and dentists. Staff confirmed this, with 1 staff member saying, “As a team we communicate well. If there are any concerns would contact the doctor, SALT team, and social worker. We try to make sure there is the same staff on each unit, so residents get to know the same face.” Records showed the provider worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals.

The provider supported people to manage their health and live healthier lives.

Relatives told us how staff supported people with their wellbeing, diet and exercise. A relative told us, “I have seen the activities coordinator. They do activities to keep residents active.”

Staff supported people to make healthier choices and decisions and gave us examples of how they encouraged people to live a healthy life. One staff member said, “We encourage fruit and vegetables and encourage people to drink plenty of fluids.” The manager told us, “We support people to have healthy food and to take part in physical activities.” People were encouraged to take part in physical exercise, and we saw an exercise session was taking place on the day of our visit. Care plans recorded different approaches to encourage people to live healthier lives. People’s diet and weight were monitored in accordance with their assessed need.

The provider routinely monitored people’s health and treatment to continuously improve it. People and their relatives told us about the positive outcomes they had as a result of living at the service. Outcomes relating to people’s social needs were met. For example, we saw photographic evidence of community engagement. One person told us, “I am living the life, I do what I want, no stress.” A relative told us, “Mum is happy and safe in the home, she is a different person since moving in, in a positive way.” People’s health and care needs were monitored and the provider worked alongside other professionals such as the GP and social care staff to ensure positive outcomes for people. The manager told us, “We have regular training which gives us the skills to monitor people. We make sure care plans and risk assessments are in place and are reviewed often or when a change takes place.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People and their relatives told us they were supported to make decisions about their care and support. One person told us, “I am able to make my own decisions.” A relative told us, “My relative makes their own decisions regarding their care and support.” Staff told us they received mental capacity training and promoted people's best interests. One staff member said, “I ask for consent when entering a bedroom, for example, I will knock on the door and ask if I can enter.” Another staff member told us, “I always gain consent and explain to the resident what I am doing, so they feel safe.” We saw that when required the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was followed. For example, plans were in place for a person who required their medicines to be administered covertly. We saw evidence of a mental capacity assessment, best interest decision, and guidance for staff about how to administer the medicine covertly and safely.