CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Home Park Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe recruitment, enough staff and safe medicines management. They also found infection prevention arrangements were effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received care based on assessments, staff had induction and ongoing training, and people were supported with food, drink and healthcare. One person's weight had been recorded incorrectly.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed respectful and kind care. People were supported to make choices and staff knew their preferences and life stories.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were detailed, personalised and reviewed with people and families. The home offered activities, communication aids and a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective management oversight, regular audits and good communication. This improved from Requires Improvement, and the previous Regulation 17 breach had been resolved.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Home Park Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements in leadership and one weight-recording error.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 January 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staffing was sufficient and care plans contained useful information.
The inspection was prompted partly by concerns about care quality and earlier improvements needed in leadership. Inspectors found improvements had been made. The overall Good rating remained the same as in 2019, while Well-led improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough skilled staff to meet people's needs. Staffing was reviewed and adjusted according to people's changing needs.
“There were enough skilled staff deployed to support people and meet their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely, were in date and had accurate records for receipt, administration and disposal.
“Accurate records were maintained of medicines received into the service, administered and disposed of.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and staff responded to requests while respecting personal choices.
“During our inspection we observed people being treated respectfully and found staff to be responsive to people's needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences and were reviewed with people and their families.
“Care records were detailed and accurately reflected people's needs.” from the report
Improved leadership
Management oversight and quality checks had improved since the previous inspection. The home was no longer in breach of the earlier governance regulation.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider is no longer in breach of regulation.” from the report
Incorrect weight record
needs fixingOne person's weight was entered incorrectly. This meant the clinical lead was not alerted, which could delay noticing a nutrition concern.
“However, one residents' weight had been incorrectly entered and therefore the clinical lead had not been alerted.” from the report
Dim corridors during work
minorSome ground-floor corridors were temporarily dim while electrical work was taking place. People were guided and supported in those areas.
“Due to the need for an electrician to work on the ground floor some corridors were dimly lit but residents were guided and supported along these areas and were aware of the situation.” from the report
- 01How do you check that people's weights are recorded correctly and that staff act quickly when there is weight loss?
- 02How do you review staffing levels when people's needs change, including when agency staff are used?
- 03Has the electrical work been completed, and are all corridors now adequately lit?
- 04How are families told about the outcome of complaints and any actions taken?
- 05What arrangements would be used if someone needed end of life care and support?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating and each question rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 May 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, June 2019
Home Park Nursing Home was rated Good overall, but inspectors found weaknesses in emergency planning, window safety and quality checks.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 7 May 2019. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, accidents, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive care. People received their medicines on time, had personalised care plans and were treated kindly. Staffing levels were sufficient, healthcare needs were followed up and people were supported to make choices.
The Well-led rating was Requires Improvement. The home's checks had not identified that its evacuation list was out of date or that some first-floor window restrictors were not secure enough. The list was updated during the inspection, and replacement window restrictors were fitted afterwards.
Medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were given as prescribed and records were accurate and up to date.
“People received their medicines safely and on time.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff giving reassurance, respecting privacy and supporting people with dignity.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff in their approach when supporting people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, life histories and interests. Staff used this information to provide meaningful support.
“Care plans contained information about people's lives, spiritual needs, hobbies and interests that ensured staff had an understanding of people's life history and what was most important to them.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices and to remain as independent as possible. Staff used the least restrictive approach described in their policies.
“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.” from the report
Out-of-date evacuation information
seriousThe emergency evacuation list did not include five newer residents and still included three people who had left. This could have put residents and emergency services at risk during an evacuation.
“The emergency evacuation record [last updated on 9 January 2019] did not contain evacuation details for five people who had moved into the service between 9 January 2019 and 7 May 2019.” from the report
Unsafe window restrictors
seriousMost first-floor window restrictors could be released by hand and were not tamper-proof. Replacement restrictors were fitted after the inspection.
“Whilst window restrictors were in place the majority on the first floor were not tamper proof and could have been easily disengaged by hand.” from the report
Quality checks missed safety issues
needs fixingThe home's audits did not identify the evacuation and window safety problems. Inspectors recommended a review of the quality assurance and monitoring systems.
“We recommend that the registered provider reviews their quality assurance and monitoring systems to ensure that they are effective in identifying all areas of improvement.” from the report
- 01How do you now keep the emergency evacuation list up to date when someone moves in or leaves?
- 02When were the replacement first-floor window restrictors fitted, and how are they checked now?
- 03How do you make sure your quality checks identify safety problems promptly?
- 04Have all self-employed staff completed the refresher training needed for their roles?
- 05Who is currently responsible for the home while the manager's registration application is in progress?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC questions; the previous inspection in December 2016 had rated the home Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 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 Home Park Nursing Home
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.