CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Park House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks. They found suitable arrangements for visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and admissions.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Park House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection prevention and control.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 18 March 2021. It looked at how the home prevented and controlled COVID-19 infections, rather than reviewing all aspects of care.
Inspectors found that people were consulted about testing, vaccinations and household arrangements. Staff supported contact with families through outdoor visits, indoor visits, window visits, video calls, letters, photographs and emails.
Inspectors were assured that the home used suitable infection control policies, personal protective equipment, testing, social distancing and cleaning arrangements. The home was inspected but not rated.
Keeping people informed
People were consulted throughout the pandemic. This included decisions about testing, vaccinations and whether to remain as one household or move into smaller groups.
“The people who used the service had been consulted and kept informed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Family contact
Staff used several ways to help people stay in touch with the people they loved, including visits, video calls, letters, photographs and emails.
“Staff had supported the people who used the service to keep in regular contact with those they loved.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors saw infection control policies being followed. Staff used personal protective equipment correctly, and infection control leads were in place.
“The service had robust policies and procedures in place relating to infection prevention and control that we observed being adhered to during our inspection.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was visibly clean, with arrangements for regular cleaning. A person living there said their room was cleaned every day and remained clean and hygienic.
“The home was visibly clean throughout with procedures in place to ensure all areas were effectively cleaned on a regular basis.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How are visits and contact with family members currently managed?
- 03How are new admissions tested and supported safely?
- 04How often are residents' rooms and shared areas cleaned?
- 05How are residents consulted about vaccinations, testing and changes to household arrangements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 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, September 2019
Park House is Rated Good, with Outstanding caring, although inspectors found some minor medicines, staffing and cleanliness concerns.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 14 August 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, quality checks and health and safety documents.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were also rated Good. Caring improved from Good to Outstanding. Inspectors found kind and respectful staff, personalised care, good activities and strong involvement of people in decisions.
The inspection also found some issues to watch. Medicine cabinet keys were easily accessible, medicine storage temperatures sometimes exceeded the recommended limit, some chairs were stained, and some people raised concerns about busy periods and night staffing. The report says these matters were being addressed or did not cause concern during the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently described staff as caring, patient and respectful. Inspectors found that people felt safe, valued and listened to.
“Staff at all levels demonstrated an exceptionally caring approach that made people feel safe, comforted and valued.” from the report
Involvement in decisions
People were involved in their own care and had a direct say in some parts of running the home, including staff recruitment and menu planning.
“The people who used the service were included in staff recruitment decisions and were part of interview panels” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's needs, wishes and life histories. Staff knew people well and supported their choices in daily routines.
“Care plans were individual to each person and reviewed on a regular basis.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered a varied activities programme and supported people to maintain relationships with family, friends and the wider community.
“A full and varied activities programme was available to people who spoke positively about this aspect of the service.” from the report
Sensitive end-of-life care
Relatives described compassionate support for people and families during the end of life and after death.
“People received kind, comforting and sensitive care at the end of their lives that met their wishes.” from the report
Medicine cabinet keys
needs fixingAlthough medicine cabinets were secure, inspectors said the keys were easily accessible. This could pose a risk to some people.
“Whilst the medicines cabinets in people's rooms were found to be secure we did note that the keys were easily accessible which may pose a risk to some people.” from the report
Medicine storage temperatures
needs fixingThe temperature where medicines were stored occasionally reached or exceeded the upper limit. The manager said this had already been identified and was being corrected.
“The temperature medicines were stored in occasionally met or exceeded the upper limit” from the report
Staffing at busy times
needs fixingSome people said staff were less available when people were getting up or going to bed. A relative also raised concerns about staffing levels at night, although inspectors saw needs being met promptly.
“two people raised concerns that staff were very busy at times when people were retiring to, and rising from, bed.” from the report
Stained chairs
minorSome easy chairs needed cleaning. The provider said a planned deep clean was due shortly.
“However, we did identify that some easy chairs were stained and required cleaning.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to make sure medicine cabinet keys cannot be easily accessed?
- 02How are medicine storage temperatures checked now, and what happens if they go above the limit?
- 03How many staff are normally on duty at night and during the busiest times of the day?
- 04Have the stained easy chairs been cleaned or replaced?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in reviewing care plans, activities and menus?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 September 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 Park House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 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.