Archived: Park House Nursing Home

Updated 7 September 2015

We undertook an unannounced focused inspection of Park House Nursing Home on 26 August 2015. This inspection was completed to check that improvements to meet legal requirements planned by the provider after our comprehensive inspection of 9 December 2014 had been made. We inspected the service against one of the five questions we ask about services: is the service safe. This is because the service was not meeting legal requirements in relation to that question.

The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

Before our inspection we looked at all of the information that we held about the home. This included the provider’s action plan, which we received on 14 July 2015.

During our inspection we spoke with two people who lived in the home. We also spoke with two nurses, the registered manager and the clinical lead. We looked at four people’s medication administration records. We looked at policies and procedures.

Updated 7 September 2015

Park House Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation, nursing care and personal care for up to 52 older people and people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 45 people living in the home.

This unannounced inspection took place on 9 & 19 December 2014. The previous inspection was in May 2013 and the provider was meeting the regulations that we assessed.

The home had a registered manager in post. 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.

There were poor arrangements for the management of medicines which meant that people were put at risk of not receiving their medicines as prescribed.

People were not protected against the risk of acquiring an infection because staff had not followed the Department of Health guidelines for the prevention and control of infection in care homes.

The risk of abuse for people was reduced because staff knew how to recognise and report abuse.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and were aware of what they meant for people in the home. They followed guidance and submitted applications to the appropriate agencies. People who lacked capacity had best interest assessments completed.

Staff received a comprehensive induction and were supported in their roles through regular supervision, annual appraisals and training to ensure they understood their roles and responsibilities.

People’s health and care needs were assessed and reviewed so that staff knew how to care for and support people in the home. People had access to a wide variety of health professionals who were requested appropriately and who provided information and plans to maintain people’s health and wellbeing.

People and their relatives were confident raising any concerns or complaints with the management and that action would be taken. If people wanted, independent advocates could be sourced for them by the staff or management.

Staff supported people with activities that they enjoyed.

People in the home and their relatives were very happy with the staff and management. People were involved in meetings, and action was taken on requests or comments raised.

The provider had an effective quality assurance system in place which it used to help drive improvements to people’s care and the home they lived in.

We found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.