CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at South Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, and risks, medicines, infection control and the environment were managed safely. Inspectors recommended improvements to reporting safeguarding incidents and recording some recruitment information.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs, choices, health and nutritional needs were assessed and supported. Staff had suitable training and the home worked with healthcare professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated kindly and respectfully. Staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and people's choices about daily life.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and reflected people's wishes. People were supported with relationships, communication, activities and access to the local community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open, positive culture and systems to monitor quality and make improvements. The manager had good oversight and worked effectively with other professionals.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care and improvements since the previous inspection, with some reporting and recruitment records needing attention.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection. Inspectors visited on 20 June and 3 July 2023, spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, safety and management records.
The home supported 10 people with learning disabilities and sensory impairments. Inspectors rated all five areas Good. They found people were safe, treated with kindness and dignity, involved in decisions, supported to access activities and the community, and cared for by staff who knew them well.
The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in 2019. The earlier breaches of regulations had been addressed, and the home was no longer in breach. Inspectors still recommended improvements to reporting safeguarding incidents and recording recruitment information.
Kind and respectful care
People were supported in a kind and caring way. Staff respected privacy and dignity and encouraged people to remain independent.
“People were supported in a kind, caring, and respectful way.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care and daily routines. Staff supported personal choices and encouraged people to do what they could for themselves.
“People made their own decisions regarding their daily lives.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's needs, preferences and wishes. Staff knew people well and adapted communication to support them.
“People's care records were person centred.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in activities they enjoyed at the home and in the local community, including gardening, swimming, horse riding and pet therapy.
“People participated in a wide range of activities both at the service and within the local community.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff supported people to take medicines in a way suited to their communication and choices.
“Medicines were managed, stored and administered safely.” from the report
Improved leadership
Quality systems and management oversight had improved since the previous inspection. The home used accidents and incidents to identify lessons and improve care.
“Quality assurance systems and processes were in place to monitor the service and drive improvement.” from the report
Safeguarding reports
needs fixingIncidents were recorded but were not always reported to the agencies that needed to know, such as the local authority. The provider acted during the inspection, and inspectors recommended reviewing the reporting system.
“incidents, whilst recorded, were not always reported to the required agencies, for example the local authority.” from the report
Recruitment records
minorSome recruitment information was not consistently recorded, including gaps in employment history. The provider acted during the inspection, and inspectors recommended reviewing the recording system.
“some checks were not consistently recorded, for example, gaps in employment history.” from the report
- 01How are safeguarding incidents reported to the local authority and other required agencies?
- 02What changes have been made to ensure all recruitment information, including employment gaps, is recorded?
- 03How will you continue checking that people's care plans and risk assessments reflect their current needs?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care reviews and decisions?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; it followed breaches found at the 2019 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 August 2023 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, October 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care, but ongoing safety, cleanliness and management problems led to breaches and a warning notice.
This was an unannounced inspection based on the previous rating. One inspector visited on 18 and 24 June 2019, spoke with people, staff and relatives, and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was caring. Relatives said people were happy, and staff treated people kindly, with dignity and respect. Care records were detailed and person-centred, and people were supported to make choices and stay as independent as possible.
However, some safety risks had not been properly identified or checked. Inspectors found problems with window restrictors, water temperature checks, an alternating pressure mattress, cleanliness and missing supplies such as soap and paper towels. Daily records did not always show the correct times or activities.
The home had not made or sustained enough improvement since the previous inspection. Its overall rating remained Requires Improvement for the second consecutive inspection. The provider breached Regulations 12 and 17, and received a warning notice for safety concerns.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw caring and kind interactions. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“Staffs' interactions with people were caring and kind.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions about their care, meals, activities and daily lives. Care records described what people could do independently.
“People were supported to make decisions about their care and support.” from the report
Person-centred care plans
The care records inspectors reviewed included people’s preferences, life histories and information about how they wanted to be supported.
“Care records were very detailed and person centred.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff who administered medicines were trained and competent, and medicines records were accurate. Staff checked each medicine’s name and dose before giving it.
“Medicines were administered by staff appropriately trained and competent staff.” from the report
Support to access the community
The home had helped at least one person begin accessing the community again, and relatives were generally satisfied with activities and outings.
“One relative told us how the home had supported their relation to begin accessing the community.” from the report
Unmanaged safety checks
seriousChecks of water temperatures were incomplete, some window restrictors were missing when inspectors first visited, and there was no recorded setting or checking process for one person’s pressure mattress. These issues led to a breach of Regulation 12.
“This placed people at risk of harm. This was a continued breach of regulation 12 (Safe Care and Treatment)” from the report
Poor cleanliness
seriousInspectors found dirty kitchen areas, soiled laundry handling, a discoloured bathroom jug and missing soap and paper towels. Cleaning tasks had not been completed on eight of 24 days checked.
“We saw the cutlery drawer was visibly dirty and a pan cupboard was soiled.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousAudits and monthly reports had not found the problems identified during the inspection. Meeting records did not show whether some actions had been completed, leading to a breach of Regulation 17.
“Neither the audits or the registered providers monthly reports had identified the shortfalls evidenced within the safe, effective and responsive sections of this report.” from the report
Incomplete staff supervision
needs fixingNot all staff had evidence of regular supervision, and staff who had worked for more than a year had not received an annual appraisal.
“Staff had not received an annual appraisal of their performance.” from the report
Daily records not always accurate
needs fixingStaff sometimes entered information later in the day, so records did not always show when support happened. Activities were not routinely recorded.
“Staff did not always record entries until later in the day, therefore the time recorded was not always an accurate reflection of the time people received support.” from the report
No call system
needs fixingThe home did not have a call system, and inspectors found no evidence that equipment had been trialled since the previous inspection.
“There was no call system at the home.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to make sure water temperatures are recorded and safe, including cold water checks?
- 02How do you now check that pressure mattresses are set correctly and that all staff know the required settings?
- 03What changes have been made to cleaning checks, and how do you make sure soap and paper towels are always available?
- 04How do you now record activities and the actual times people receive support?
- 05What progress has been made with installing or trialling a call system?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions; the provider also operated a domiciliary service, but CQC only considered its personal care activity. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 October 2019 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 South Park
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 2010.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kirklees
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 86 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.