CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Castle Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control. They found arrangements for safe visiting, admissions, testing, social distancing and the use of personal protective equipment.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this inspection.
What inspectors found, August 2022
Castle Park was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, with some resources suggested for further development.
This was an announced inspection on 28 October 2020. It was part of a CQC thematic review looking at infection prevention and control in care homes during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visitors, hand hygiene, temperature checks, personal protective equipment, testing, admissions, social distancing and visits. People were also supported to keep in touch with family and friends and to take part in activities.
The home was inspected but not rated. The report says inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control procedures were keeping people safe. It does not provide an overall quality rating.
Visitor infection controls
The home had clear entry arrangements, hand sanitiser, temperature checks, personal protective equipment checks and escorted hand washing for visitors.
“The service had signage displayed on the main entrance to alert visitors to restrictions on entering the building and the infection control measures they would need to take.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Staff used personal protective equipment in line with government guidance, with designated areas for putting it on and taking it off.
“Staff wore PPE in line with government guidance and designated areas were set up within the service for staff to remove and apply PPE.” from the report
Testing and admissions
The home had systems for testing people and staff, and arrangements intended to make admissions safe.
“There were good systems of testing for covid-19 for people and staff.” from the report
Contact and activities
People were supported to take part in activities, maintain contact with family and friends, and follow social distancing arrangements.
“People were supported to join in activities to maintain their wellbeing. Measures were in place to ensure they kept in touch with family and friends.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors suggested resources to help the home develop its infection prevention and control approach further. The report does not explain what specific changes were needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to infection prevention and control since the inspection on 28 October 2020?
- 02Are the visiting arrangements and winter visiting facilities now fully in place?
- 03How are people and staff currently tested for covid-19 and other infections?
- 04How does the home support residents to keep in touch with family and friends when visits are restricted?
- 05What resources did the home use after inspectors signposted further guidance, and what changed as a result?
This was an announced thematic review of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not rate the other four key questions or the service overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 August 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, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective leadership.
This was an unannounced inspection on 02 March 2020. Inspectors spoke with four people who used the service, one relative and six staff. They reviewed care records and records about how the home was managed.
The home was supporting 24 people, and could support up to 27. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines practice and good safeguarding arrangements. People received help with eating, drinking and healthcare.
Inspectors found that staff knew people well, treated them with kindness and supported their choices. Activities were arranged around people's interests, and communication needs were understood.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 24 July 2017.
Enough skilled staff
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills, and staff responded to people promptly. Recruitment checks were also described as robust.
“There were enough staff with the right skills to keep people safe.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's likes and dislikes and used this knowledge to provide care in the way people preferred. People were also supported to make choices.
“Staff knew people very well, including their likes and dislikes and used this information to care for people in a way they preferred.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People appeared relaxed with staff and were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect.
“Staff treated everyone with equal kindness and compassion.” from the report
Good activities and communication
The home arranged activities to suit different interests and used personalised communication aids. People's communication needs were identified and understood.
“The home benefitted from a dedicated activities coordinator who planned a range of activities to suit people’s different interests, including pamper sessions, movie nights and days out.” from the report
Strong management
The home had clear checks on quality and safety. The manager was visible, open and involved people and staff in how the home was run.
“There were clear and effective governance arrangements in place to ensure the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and meet my relative's individual needs and preferences?
- 02How would you support my relative's particular communication needs?
- 03What activities would be suitable for my relative, and how would you support them to take part?
- 04How would you support my relative with eating, drinking and any complex dietary needs?
- 05How would you involve our family in care planning and decisions about healthcare?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the care home premises and care provided both included. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 April 2020 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 Castle Park
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Hull, City of
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.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,350 a week. 12 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.