CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield is Rated Good; inspectors found major improvements, with safe care, caring staff and stronger management.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 9 and 11 May 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care, reviewed records and checked medicines, staffing, training, infection control and management systems.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found that medicines, risk assessments, care plans, infection control and quality checks had improved. There were enough staff and people were supported with food, drink, healthcare and lawful decision-making.
The inspection followed an earlier Requires Improvement rating and three breaches of regulations. The provider had received a warning notice and completed an action plan. Inspectors found the home was no longer in breach of regulations. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating.
Kind staff
People experienced thoughtful care and positive interactions with staff.
“Staff were thoughtful and caring. Positive interactions took place between people and the staff team.” from the report
Improved care records
Care plans and risk assessments had been reviewed and were more complete and up to date.
“All care plans had been recently reviewed in line with best practice, to ensure they remained up to date and valid to meet people's needs.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals reported positive changes under the new manager. Staff felt able to raise concerns.
“The service promoted an open and person centred culture. We received very positive feedback from all those we spoke with about the new manager.” from the report
Some DBS checks were not routinely updated
minorInspectors found that some criminal record checks were not routinely renewed every three years, which the report describes as best practice. The manager said this would be addressed immediately.
“We noted that some DBS checks were not routinely updated every three years as is best practice.” from the report
Some work was still ongoing
minorRefurbishment, garden improvements and the move to electronic care records were still being completed or planned at the time of inspection.
“The provider was in the process of implementing an electronic recording system to support staff with the upkeep of care records.” from the report
- 01Have all staff DBS checks now been reviewed and updated where needed?
- 02Has the new manager completed the application to become the registered manager?
- 03How have the improvements to medicines checks and care records been maintained since this inspection?
- 04Has the electronic care recording system been fully introduced, and have all staff received the required training?
- 05What work remains on the garden and refurbishment, and how does this affect residents?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 June 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring staff but unsafe medicines processes, incomplete records and weak oversight.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 22 and 25 November 2021. Inspectors looked at Safe, Effective and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and management records.
Some improvements had been made since the previous inspection, especially with infection control. However, vaccination checks for visiting professionals were not fully monitored. Some areas needed better cleaning. Medicine records, care plans, risk assessments and nutrition records were not always complete or up to date.
People and relatives said staff were caring and that people felt safe. There were enough staff during the inspection, although there had been some sickness-related shortages. The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, as did Safe, Effective and Well-led. This means the report found limited assurance about safety and inconsistent management, with an increased risk that people could be harmed.
Caring staff
People and relatives said staff worked hard to meet care needs and were caring.
“People and relatives told us staff worked hard to ensure their care needs were met and were complimentary about the caring nature of staff.” from the report
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and relatives shared this view.
“People told us they felt safe. Relatives confirmed those views.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff during the inspection, and recruitment checks included DBS checks and references.
“There was enough staff working in the service.” from the report
Food and fluids
People were supported with their food and drink needs, including special diets and extra support where needed.
“People were supported with their nutritional and hydration needs, including any special diets or support they may have required.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to report concerns. The home was no longer in breach of the safeguarding regulation.
“Staff had received training and could explain what abuse was and how they would report any concerns they had.” from the report
Medicine records and processes
seriousMedicine administration records had gaps. Instructions for some skin medicines were unclear, and protocols for medicines given when needed were not always available during medicine rounds.
“Medicines were not always managed safely and effectively.” from the report
Infection control
seriousSome areas were dirty or cluttered. Checks on infection control and vaccination evidence for visiting professionals were not fully monitored.
“Infection control procedures were not always safe.” from the report
Incomplete care and risk records
needs fixingCare plans and risk assessments were not always updated or in place. Some risks included finances, behaviour and contractors working in the building.
“Records were not always detailed, up to date or in place, including care plans, risk assessments, monitoring checks or kitchen records regarding nutrition.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousAudits were not always completed regularly, and the provider had not identified or corrected all the problems found by inspectors.
“Quality checks and oversight by the provider were not robust.” from the report
Staff support records
needs fixingSupervision was not always carried out as often as planned. Induction records and return-to-work interviews were not always available.
“Staff felt supported. However, records indicated supervision was not completed at the frequency identified by the provider.” from the report
- 01How are you checking that every medicine, including skin creams and medicines given when needed, is recorded correctly?
- 02What regular checks now confirm that cleaning, PPE and vaccination evidence for visiting professionals are being managed safely?
- 03How are care plans and risk assessments updated when a person's needs or circumstances change?
- 04What action has been taken in response to the Regulation 17 warning notice, and what evidence can you show of improvement?
- 05How do you now check that there are enough staff for people's needs and that staff receive regular supervision?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 January 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield →
- January 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Carlisle Dementia Centre - Parkfield →
- August 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.