CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Park Avenue Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and outbreak management. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Park Avenue Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 2 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 were affecting care.
The home had screening for visitors, clear signs about visiting rules and separate visiting rooms that were deep cleaned. Staff breaks were staggered and social distancing arrangements were in place.
Inspectors were assured about the use of protective equipment, testing, admissions, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The service met the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five areas inspectors usually consider.
Visitor screening
Visitors were checked for respiratory infection symptoms and given clear information about visiting requirements.
“Visitors were screened for symptoms of respiratory infection on arrival at the home.” from the report
Clean visiting spaces
The home had rooms for specific purposes, including visiting, and these were deep cleaned regularly.
“Rooms were designated for specific purposes, such as visiting, and were deep cleaned regularly.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, provided testing and kept its infection control policy up to date.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Vaccination checks
The home met the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently screened, and what visiting arrangements are now in place?
- 02How do you manage staffing pressures when staff are absent because of COVID-19?
- 03How do you currently provide and check the safe use of personal protective equipment?
- 04How do you manage infection outbreaks and keep the infection prevention and control policy up to date?
- 05How do you check that non-exempt staff and visiting professionals meet the current vaccination requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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, but some topical medicines records were not complete.
Inspectors visited on 12 and 13 February 2020. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as safe, well supported and treated with kindness. Care plans gave staff detailed information about people's needs, choices and communication.
There were isolated recording errors in topical medicines records. Inspectors found no evidence of harm, but recommended that topical creams should be recorded and audited more carefully. The home had improved since the previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement and had two regulatory breaches.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff deployed to meet people's needs. Recruitment included background and identity checks, induction and shadowing.
“We found that there were enough staff recruited and deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive and understood people's routines, personalities and backgrounds. People and relatives said staff respected their privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff were kind and attentive to people and clearly knew people and their personalities well.” from the report
Personalised care plans
Care plans explained people's needs and how they wanted support to be given. They were reviewed when people's health or wellbeing changed.
“Care plans contained detailed person-centred guidance for staff on what people's needs were and how they wanted them to be met.” from the report
Activities and engagement
The activities coordinator planned activities around people's interests. Individual activity logs recorded what people did, their mood and whether they enjoyed it.
“People had an individual activities log which recorded what people did, their mood, and whether they enjoyed the activity.” from the report
Topical medicines records
needs fixingInspectors found isolated recording errors in topical medicines administration records. They found no evidence of harm, but recommended that topical creams should be recorded and audited more carefully.
“We found isolated incidents of recording errors in relation to topical medicines administration records (TMARS).” from the report
Tired parts of the building
minorThe home was clean and tidy, but some interior areas needed refurbishment. Plans for refurbishment were in place and had been discussed with the provider.
“The home was clean and tidy however elements of the building's interior were tired and in need of refurbishment.” from the report
Faith information
minorPeople's religious and cultural preferences were recorded, but inspectors said the care plans needed more detail about how people engaged with their faith.
“Care plans would benefit from a greater level of detail to ensure people's level of engagement with their faith was captured.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that topical medicines are recorded correctly every time?
- 02Have the planned refurbishment works been completed, and which areas still need attention?
- 03How will you record and support my relative's religious or cultural preferences?
- 04What changes were made after the previous inspection, when the home was rated Requires Improvement?
- 05How do you make sure staffing levels remain stable and safe?
This was a planned inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 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 Park Avenue Care Home
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 January 2018.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 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.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.