Park Farm Lodge

Park Farm Lodge is a care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 84 people. The service provides support to older people, people living with dementia and people with physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 79 people using the service. Park Farm Lodge can accommodate 84 people in one adapted building.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were safeguarded from abuse, the providers systems meant staff understood what signs to look for and reported any incidents for investigation.

Risks to people were assessed and plans put in place to mitigate them. Staff had knowledge of how to support people safely when providing their care.

The provider had safe recruitment processes in place and people were supported by enough staff who were suitably skilled and trained.

Medicines were managed safely, and people had the support they needed from trained staff to receive their medicines as prescribed.

Where incidents had occurred, these were investigated, and steps taken to prevent them from happening again.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The provider had systems in place to have oversight of the care people received and they carried out regular checks of the quality of the service.

People were engaged and involved in the service and their views were sought regularly. Relatives and staff also had opportunities to share their views.

There was a learning culture in place and the provider engaged with external agencies as required to ensure people had the right support.

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 23 August 2021).

Why we inspected

This inspection was carried out to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good based on the findings of this inspection.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Park Farm Lodge is a residential care home providing nursing and personal care to 72 people at the time of the inspection, some of whom were living with dementia. The service can support up to 80 older people.

The home has bedrooms over the ground and first floor. People have access to communal areas and the garden.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

Infection, prevention and control procedures had been revised by the provider. This means people were better protected from contracting infectious illnesses. However, improvements were still needed to ensure equipment was properly cleaned.

The provider had undertaken work to correct potential hazards to people.

Substances hazardous to health and medicines were now correctly stored.

The provider had revised and introduced more effective quality monitoring systems in order to drive good care.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 14 July 2021).

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

Why we inspected

We undertook this targeted inspection to check whether the Warning Notice we previously served in relation to Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 had been met.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

The overall rating for the service has not changed following this targeted inspection and remains requires improvement.

CQC have introduced targeted inspections to follow up on a Warning Notice or other specific concerns. They do not look at an entire key question, only the part of the key question we are specifically concerned about. Targeted inspections do not change the rating from the previous inspection. This is because they do not assess all areas of a key question.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Park Farm Lodge is a residential care home providing nursing and personal care to 72 people at the time of the inspection, some of whom were living with dementia. The service can support up to 80 older people.

The home has bedrooms over the ground and first floor. People have access to communal areas and the garden.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were not always safe as the infection prevention and control procedures were not effectively implemented.

The provider did not have effective systems in place to identify environmental issues which could put people at the risk of harm.

The provider did not have effective systems in place to identify and drive good and safe care provision.

Medicines were not safely stored although people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of abuse and knew what to do if they suspected something was wrong.

People found the management team to be approachable although their first point of contact would always be the care staff. Staff members thought communication from the management team could be improved.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 20 March 2018).

At this inspection we found improvements were needed to keep people safe and to effectively monitor the quality of service provided.

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the environment and the providers infection prevention and control procedures. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Following our inspection site visit the provider took action to mitigate the risks to people.

Enforcement

We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to discharge our regulatory enforcement functions required to keep people safe and to hold providers to account where it is necessary for us to do so.

We have identified breaches in relation to keeping people safe and the providers monitoring of the provision of care at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

This unannounced inspection visit took place on1 and 2 February 2018. Our last inspection was on 31 January and 1 February 2017, and at that time the overall rating of the service was ‘Requires Improvement.’ We found that improvements were needed to ensure the service was consistently effective and responsive for all the people that lived there. At this inspection, the overall rating has improved to ‘Good’ in all five key questions.

There was 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.

People were protected from harm by staff who understood how to safeguard people. Risks were assessed, managed and reviewed. There were enough staff to keep people safe, and the provider followed safe recruitment processes. Medicines were managed safely, and people were protected by the prevention and control of infection. Lessons were learnt and improvements made when incidents occurred.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s needs were assessed and support was given in line with evidence-based guidance. Staff had the knowledge and skills needed to provide effective care for people. People’s nutritional needs were met, and they were supported to access healthcare services. The layout of the building was accessible for the people who lived there.

Staff were caring and compassionate in the way they supported people who used the service. People’s privacy was respected and their dignity and independence was promoted. People were enabled to direct the care they received, and staff listened to them. Visitors were encouraged and people were able to maintain relationships that were important to them.

People received care that was personal to them and responded to their needs. They were able to participate in activities they enjoyed in the home and community. People were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care, and the records supported staff to offer individual support to them. People and their relatives were confident in raising issues or concerns, and the provider responded to these in a timely manner.

The registered manager was supported by senior staff and the roles staff had were clear to people. The provider was committed to making improvements in the home, and involved people with these plans. Staff were motivated in their work and supported to carry out their roles. People and staff were encouraged to be involved in the development of the service, and their feedback was listened to and acted upon. The registered manager understood their responsibilities as a registered person.

There was 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.

This was our first inspection since the location had reregistered with a new provider. We had previously inspected the home on 21 April 2016, when it was under a different provider. When the new provider took over the home, the registered manager and staff remained the same. We have referred to the previous inspection within this report. We had told the previous provider to make improvements to ensure there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. At this inspection, we found that the required improvements had been made. However, we found that other improvements were needed.

Staff gained people’s consent before supporting them. However, when people were not able to make certain decisions for themselves, staff had variable understanding as to how this should be done legally and in accordance with guidance available. When people lacked capacity and were being restricted, the provider had ensured this was done lawfully. People did not always receive care that was individual and personal to them. Some people were not able to participate in stimulating activities that they could engage with.

There were enough staff to meet people’s care needs, and the provider had safe recruitment processes in place. People were protected from harm by staff who knew how to recognise and report any concerns. Risks to people were assessed, managed and reviewed to minimise potential harm. People’s medicines were managed safely by staff who were suitably trained and supported to do this.

Staff received training to enable them to carry out their roles. People were supported to maintain and balanced diet and good health.

People were cared for by staff who were respectful and kind towards them. Staff knew people well and supported them in a dignified manner. People’s privacy was respected and their independence promoted. Visitors were made to feel welcome and important relationships were maintained.

People were involved in the planning of their care and knew how to raise any concerns which were then acted on. There was a positive culture within the home and staff felt supported to carry out their roles. People were encouraged to share their views and give feedback about the support they received. The quality of the service was monitored and this information was used to drive continuous improvement.