CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Park House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from harm, there were enough suitable staff, medicines were managed safely and risks were assessed. Infection control was also found to be safe, although some areas needed refreshing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its rating carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and staff knew people's preferences and communication needs. Inspectors recommended that the home consult current guidance on meaningful engagement activities for people living with dementia.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, clear management arrangements and regular quality checks. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views, and learning from incidents was shared.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and good leadership, with a recommendation to improve activities for people living with dementia.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 17 October 2023. Inspectors looked at whether the home was safe, responsive and well-led. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, audits, training and recruitment files.
The home was rated Good overall. People were protected from harm, medicines were managed safely, and inspectors found enough suitable staff. People were treated with respect, staff knew them well, and relatives said concerns were dealt with promptly.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. Responsive improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, while Safe and Well-led stayed Good. The inspection did not assess Effective or Caring, so those ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
People felt safe
Staff understood safeguarding responsibilities, risks were assessed and care plans gave staff clear guidance. Inspectors also found enough suitable staff to meet people's needs.
“People were protected from the risk of harm, they felt safe, and staff were aware of how to raise any safeguarding concerns.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored and given safely by trained staff. Inspectors observed that people were not rushed during a medicine round.
“We observed a medicine round. Staff followed the correct procedures; people were not rushed and were given time to take their medicines.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, interests and communication needs. Staff were observed treating people respectfully and knew them well.
“People were supported as individuals in line with their needs and preferences.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found a positive culture and systems for monitoring quality and improving the service. Relatives said the manager was approachable and concerns were addressed.
“There was a positive and open culture at the service.” from the report
Dementia activities
needs fixingAn exercise activity was disrupted by noise, which caused confusion. One person was withdrawn and received limited staff engagement, so inspectors recommended reviewing best practice for meaningful activities.
“1 person was visibly withdrawn and there was limited staff engagement with them for the duration of our observation.” from the report
Worn areas
minorThe home was visibly clean, but some parts needed refreshing. The provider said a refurbishment plan was in place.
“carpets were worn and in need of replacement” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to activities for people living with dementia following the CQC recommendation?
- 02How will you prevent noise and interruptions from causing confusion during activities?
- 03When will the worn carpets and other areas needing refreshing be dealt with under the refurbishment plan?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels remain sufficient as residents' needs change?
- 05How are relatives' concerns recorded, responded to and used to improve care?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their ratings carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 November 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, December 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found kind care, safe staffing arrangements and good infection control, but this was a limited check of specific concerns.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 25 November 2021. Two inspectors checked concerns about staffing, safeguarding and people's safety. They spoke with three people and five staff, observed care at lunchtime and reviewed care, incident and management records.
People and staff gave positive feedback. Inspectors saw kind and caring interactions. They found that staff understood people's risks, call bells were answered in good time, and staffing levels were reviewed as people's needs changed.
The home was clean and well maintained. Inspectors were assured that infection control, testing, visiting arrangements and use of protective equipment were in place.
The home was inspected but not rated at this visit. The previous overall rating was Good, published on 2 October 2018. The Safe rating was not reviewed or changed because inspectors only examined the parts linked to the specific concerns.
Kind care
Inspectors observed kind and caring interactions between staff and residents. People also spoke positively about the care they received.
“We observed kind and caring interactions between staff and the people who lived at the service.” from the report
Risk management
Risk assessments covered areas such as falls, choking, pressure care and moving and handling. These were reviewed regularly, and accidents were checked to help prevent them happening again.
“Personalised risk assessments were in place and had been reviewed regularly.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely and had arrangements for testing, visiting, cleaning and managing infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Staffing was a reason for inspection
minorThe inspection followed concerns about staffing and whether people's needs were being met. Inspectors found staffing levels reflected changing needs, but staff said there were enough staff on most occasions rather than all occasions.
“Staff told us they were enough staff on most occasions.” from the report
- 01How do you review staffing levels when people's needs change, and what happens if there are staff shortages?
- 02How do you check that call bells are answered promptly at busy times?
- 03What safeguarding concerns have been raised since this inspection, and how would the home report them to the local authority, police or CQC?
- 04How do you keep infection control, PPE and visiting arrangements up to date when guidance changes?
- 05What improvements have been made since the previous Good rating published on 2 October 2018?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of specific concerns about staffing, safeguarding and safety, with infection control also checked; it was not a full review of all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 December 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.
Every inspection of Park House Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 January 2016.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Peterborough
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 £1,370 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I honestly feel lucky to have found her and have already booked her for another visit.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.