CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Ilford Park Polish Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe, and risks were assessed with clear actions for staff. Medicines were generally managed safely, but handwritten changes were not always recorded and signed by two staff.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained, supported and worked with health professionals. People were supported with food, drink and healthcare, although feedback about the temperature and variety of meals was mixed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw people treated with dignity and respect, and staff understood their histories, preferences and cultural needs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and activities reflected people's interests and cultural and religious lives. However, some care plans and daily records needed more person-centred detail.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had effective checks on quality and used feedback, incidents and care reviews to make improvements. People, relatives, staff and visiting professionals were involved in the service.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Ilford Park Polish Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some medicines, recruitment, care planning and food records needing attention.
This was a planned inspection on 21 and 22 January 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting health professional. They observed care and checked care, medicines and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by enough trained staff. The home helped people keep their Polish culture, access healthcare, enjoy activities and make choices about their care.
There were some areas to improve. Handwritten changes to medicines records were not always checked and signed by two staff. Some staff files lacked references, and some care records did not give enough detail about people's interests and daily lives. Feedback about food was mixed, and menus were being reviewed.
The home was also rated Good at its previous inspection, published on 18 August 2016. The report says it remained Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors observed kind, respectful interactions and found that staff knew people well.
“We observed staff treated people with kindness and respect.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, and people said they did not wait long for help.
“During our inspection there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Cultural and personal identity
The home supported Polish language, traditions, religion and community links. People could also personalise their rooms and use the gardens.
“People told us the home was culturally focused, in terms of it being like a 'Little Poland', and all of the signage and notices were in Polish.” from the report
Good healthcare links
Staff worked with outside health professionals, including a GP who attended a weekly clinic, to help meet people's health needs.
“Staff worked well with external professionals to ensure people were supported to access health services and had their health care needs met.” from the report
Good leadership and feedback
The home used meetings, surveys, audits and incident reviews to monitor care and make changes.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingMedicines were managed safely overall, but handwritten changes were not always recorded and signed by two staff. Inspectors recommended stronger checks and systems.
“When staff needed to make handwritten changes to medicines records, we found that these were not always recorded and signed by two members of staff.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingStaff files did not contain references from previous employers. Inspectors recommended reviewing recruitment policies and procedures.
“However, staff files did not contain references from previous employers.” from the report
Care plan detail
minorSome care plans, daily records and risk assessments did not give enough detail about people's interests or how they spent their day.
“Some care plans, daily records and risk assessments would benefit from further person-centred information.” from the report
Mixed views about food
minorSome people said meals could be cold or repetitive. The home was reviewing menus and discussing food with residents and the chef.
“We received mixed feedback about the meals provided by the home.” from the report
- 01What checks now make sure handwritten medicines changes are recorded and signed by two staff?
- 02How do you check references and other recruitment information before employing new staff?
- 03How have care plans been improved to record each person's interests, preferences and daily activities in more detail?
- 04What changes have been made to the menus following residents' mixed feedback about food temperature and variety?
- 05How will staff support my relative's Polish language, cultural, religious and personal preferences?
This was a planned inspection covering all five areas, and the home received a Good rating in each one. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 March 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 Ilford Park Polish Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.