CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Park View Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, safe recruitment checks, risk assessments and safe medicines arrangements. The premises were clean and safety checks were completed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People were supported with food, drink, health care and decisions about their care, including where they lacked capacity.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw positive and caring interactions. People were treated with dignity and respect, and were involved in planning their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records were person-centred and included people's needs, history, likes and dislikes. Activities were available, but some people and relatives wanted more activities, especially in the afternoon.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture and approachable management. Audits, meetings, surveys and other systems were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Park View Residential Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with some people wanting more afternoon activities.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 05 November 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care records, staff files and management records.
The home was supporting 59 people and could support up to 60. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training and good support with food, health care and decision-making. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 22 April 2017.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw patient, encouraging and caring interactions throughout the inspection.
“People were treated well by all the staff.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely.
“There were enough staff employed to meet people's care and support needs in a timely way.” from the report
Good support for choice
Staff understood consent and mental capacity requirements. Care records showed best-interest discussions where people could not make particular decisions.
“Throughout the inspection we saw care staff asked for permission first and explained what they were doing before supporting the person with anything.” from the report
Person-centred care
Care records included people's backgrounds, likes and dislikes, as well as their current health and support needs.
“The care records we looked at were person centred.” from the report
Clean environment
The premises were clean and maintained. Staff had access to gloves, aprons and hand sanitisers.
“The premises were clean and well maintained.” from the report
More afternoon activities requested
minorSome people and relatives said they wanted more activities, particularly in the afternoon. The manager described additional activities that were being planned.
“some people and their relatives told us they would like more activities, particularly in the afternoon.” from the report
- 01What afternoon activities are available now, and what has changed since the inspection?
- 02How do you maintain safe staffing levels when there is sickness or people's needs increase?
- 03How are relatives involved in care planning and decisions when a person cannot make a particular decision?
- 04How do you check that medicines are given as prescribed and recorded correctly?
- 05How do you use feedback from people, relatives and staff to make improvements?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 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.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also observed care, reviewed care plans and staff files, and checked records about medicines, safety and how the home was run.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable staff training, good healthcare support and respectful care. People and relatives were positive about the home and said staff were kind and approachable.
Some issues were identified, but they did not lead to a lower rating. Some staff supervision meetings were not formally recorded. One recruitment file did not show that previous employment had been checked as satisfactory. The fire risk assessment needed updating, and one care plan needed more detail.
People felt safe
People and relatives were positive about safety. Inspectors found enough staff and saw that staff responded to people's needs.
“Relatives of people living at Park View told us they felt their family member was safe” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported them patiently. Privacy, dignity, choices and consent were respected.
“We saw in all cases people were cared for by staff that were kind, patient and respectful.” from the report
Good activities and communication
People could choose whether to join activities, including trips, crafts, reminiscence work and social events. Relatives said staff communicated well when care needs changed.
“Two activity workers were employed to ensure there was a range of meaningful activities on offer every day.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Medicines were securely stored and records checked were complete. Controlled medicines were counted and checked correctly.
“We checked a four people's MAR charts and found they had been fully completed.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff said managers were approachable and listened to views. The home used audits, surveys and meetings to monitor quality.
“We saw an inclusive culture in the home.” from the report
Supervision records
needs fixingSome supervision meetings for staff were not recorded on the supervision matrix, so the home could not fully evidence that they had taken place.
“Whilst staff verbally confirmed they had been provided with supervision, we found some supervisions had not been formally recorded to fully evidence they had taken place.” from the report
Recruitment check
needs fixingOne staff file did not show that the home had checked whether previous employment with children had been satisfactory. The manager said this would be checked.
“There was no evidence the registered provider had assured themselves the employment was satisfactory.” from the report
Fire risk assessment
needs fixingThe fire risk assessment had not been reviewed since 29 February 2016 and needed updating so it remained relevant.
“The registered manager was aware the fire risk assessment had last been reviewed on 29 February 2016 and required reviewing to make sure it was relevant and up to date.” from the report
One care plan needed more detail
minorOne person's care plan had limited information in one section. The manager updated it during the inspection.
“One person's file held information in one section which was limited and would benefit from further detail so staff were fully informed.” from the report
- 01How are staff supervision meetings now recorded, including for managers and other non-care staff?
- 02Has the fire risk assessment been reviewed since the inspection, and what changes were made?
- 03How do you check that previous employment has been satisfactory before recruiting staff?
- 04How do you make sure every care plan contains enough detail about a person's needs, preferences and risks?
- 05How are people and relatives involved when care needs or activities change?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five quality areas, with interviews, observations and checks of nine care plans, three staff files and service records; the report gives two different inspection dates. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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 Park View Residential Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Park View Residential Care Home →
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Park View Residential Care Home →
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 December 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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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. 76 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.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.