CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Meadow Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, staffing and the home's response to safety advice.
Inspectors visited the home on 27 October 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the response to coronavirus outbreaks.
They looked at infection prevention and control. They were assured about visitors, outbreak management, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleanliness and the infection control policy.
The inspection also found safe staffing levels, suitable space for social distancing and prompt action after advice from commissioners and specialist health teams. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full quality rating.
Safe staffing
Staffing levels were considered safe. Managers supported care staff directly when staffing levels were at risk of becoming too low.
“Managerial staff had supported care staff with a hands-on approach to ensure people received safe care when staffing levels were in danger of falling too low.” from the report
Space for distancing
The building had several communal areas, giving people good amounts of space for social distancing.
“The premises allowed for good amounts of social distancing with multiple communal areas.” from the report
Prompt action on advice
The home worked with commissioners and specialist health teams. Inspectors found that it acted promptly on advice and made safety improvements.
“They had reacted promptly to advice and made improvements to ensure the ongoing safety of people who used the service.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain which part of the approach needed development.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes were made after inspectors signposted resources to develop the infection prevention and control approach?
- 02How do you make sure staffing levels remain safe when staffing is at risk of falling too low?
- 03How are visitors currently protected from catching or spreading infections?
- 04How do you manage testing, protective equipment and social distancing now?
- 05What improvements have been made following advice from commissioners and specialist health teams?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices, so the home was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other care quality questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 2021 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 2017
Meadow Park was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some smaller areas needing improvement.
Inspectors visited on 20, 24 and 25 July 2017. The first visit was unannounced. They spoke with people, staff and visiting professionals, and checked care plans, staff records and safety records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safer medicines management, clean premises and staff who treated people warmly and respectfully.
The home had improved since the previous inspection in April 2016, when it was rated Requires Improvement. The report says improvements had been made to medicines and staffing. A new registered manager was in post and staff and relatives said the home had become more settled.
Safer medicines management
Inspectors found that medicines records were complete and that creams and lotions were stored, recorded and stopped when no longer needed.
“Medicine administrations records (MARs) we checked had no gaps and were fully completed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and were observed using reassurance, distraction and gentle support. People and relatives spoke positively about the staff.
“We observed that staff were warm and caring in their approach to people.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home offered individual and group activities, including memory boxes, music and familiar objects for people living with dementia.
“This showed bespoke personalised activities had been provided for individuals.” from the report
Improved leadership
The new manager brought more structure and carried out regular audits and meetings. Staff reported that morale had improved.
“Staff told us they were happy with the new manager and said they had made a number of positive changes.” from the report
Bathroom design
minorSome bathrooms did not meet best practice for dementia-friendly design. The home said this would be addressed in future.
“The service took into account 'dementia friendly' design features although some bathroom areas did not meet best practice in this area.” from the report
Everyday capacity decisions
minorRecords covered capacity assessments and best-interest decisions, but information about the everyday decisions people could be supported to make was not detailed enough.
“Information about the types of non- complex every day decisions people could be supported to make could have been more detailed.” from the report
Clothing and dignity
needs fixingIn the Memory Lane unit, several people were wearing footwear without socks or tights. The manager said this would be monitored and people's preferences would be respected.
“We noted, however, that out of 11 people, eight people had shoes or slippers on with no socks or tights, two had only socks, and only two people had footwear on with socks.” from the report
Use of dementia information
needs fixingInspectors found that a functional behaviour profile was not clearly being used to guide care or activities. The manager said they would review how to use it.
“It was unclear how this information was then used to inform care planning” from the report
Communication
needs fixingThe manager had identified concerns about communication between care staff and visiting professionals. New systems were being introduced to improve this.
“Concerns had been raised about the effectiveness of communication, including between care staff and visiting professionals.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the bathrooms to make them more suitable for people living with dementia?
- 02How do you record and respect a person's preferences about wearing socks, tights and other clothing?
- 03How is information from functional behaviour profiles used in care plans and activity planning?
- 04How do you support people who lack capacity to make everyday choices?
- 05How do you make sure important information is passed between care staff and visiting health professionals?
This was a planned inspection of the overall quality and safety of the home, with the first visit unannounced; all five ratings were assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 October 2017 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 Meadow Park
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Northumberland
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 11 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.