CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Park View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- There were enough staff and medicines were managed safely, but recruitment checks and risk assessments were not always robust. Recognised risk assessment tools were not consistently used.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff received training, supervision and appraisals. However, capacity assessments had not been completed for all restrictions in place.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were patient, kind and respectful. People were encouraged to make day-to-day decisions and staff supported their privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and person-centred. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships, work and voluntary roles, although end of life wishes had not been explored.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was visible and approachable. Audits, feedback and partnership working were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Park View rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but safety systems needed improvement.
Inspectors visited on 7 and 10 October 2019. They spoke with people, staff, relatives and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People were supported by kind staff, had detailed care plans and were helped to make choices and take part in activities.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Recruitment checks were not always complete, risk assessments were not consistently robust and some capacity assessments were missing where restrictions were in place. The management team agreed to take action after the inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People appeared relaxed with staff and felt confident asking for help. Staff supported privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff were kind and patient in their approach to people.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's needs, preferences and histories. People and their representatives were invited to review their support.
“Detailed, person-centred care plans were in place and continued to be built upon as staff became more familiar with people.” from the report
Support with choice and activities
People were encouraged to make day-to-day decisions and take part in activities, employment, voluntary work and holidays according to their preferences.
“Staff supported people to continue engaging with activities and groups of their choosing, such as art classes and day services.” from the report
Approachable management
People, relatives and staff felt able to raise concerns. Managers worked alongside staff and used audits and feedback to monitor the service.
“The management team were visible and worked alongside staff in supporting people.” from the report
Recruitment checks
needs fixingRisk assessments were not always in place when staff worked without a full DBS check, and gaps in employment histories had not been explored.
“Staff recruitment were not robust. Risk assessments were not in place when staff were working without a full DBS check and gaps in people's employment had not been explored.” from the report
Risk assessments
needs fixingRisk assessments were not consistently robust and recognised tools were not always used. The management team agreed to introduce them.
“Risk assessments were not consistently robust. Recognised tools, to aid in the assessment and response to risk, were not being used.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingCapacity assessments had not been completed for all restrictions in place. The report recommended that the provider review its Mental Capacity Act guidance.
“Capacity assessments had not been completed around all the restrictions in place for people.” from the report
End of life wishes
minorThe home had not explored people's end of life wishes. The management team agreed to consider how this could be approached.
“People's end of life wishes had not been explored with them.” from the report
- 01What has been done since the inspection to make sure every staff member has the required DBS checks and that employment gaps are explored?
- 02Which recognised risk assessment tools are now used, and how are risk assessments checked for completeness?
- 03Have capacity assessments now been completed for every restriction placed on a person?
- 04How is the home reducing the use of restrictive interventions, and where is this plan recorded?
- 05How will the home discuss and record each person's end of life wishes?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided; Safe had deteriorated from Good while the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 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
Park View was rated Good; inspectors found safe, respectful and person-centred care, with end-of-life planning not yet in place.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 March 2017. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, family members, managers and care staff. They observed care and checked care records, staff files, medicines, audits and other records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, respectful care, individual care plans and a good range of activities.
The home had improved since the previous inspection in January 2016, when it was rated Requires Improvement overall and in Safe and Well-led. Environmental safety work had been completed and quality checks were stronger. Inspectors found the home met all the fundamental standards they inspected against.
Improved safety
The home had acted on environmental risks found at the previous inspection. Flooring, radiator covers and other areas had been improved to reduce the risk of trips and falls.
“At this inspection visit we found the registered provider had resurfaced the external area outside the dining room to prevent trips and falls.” from the report
Respect and dignity
Staff spoke politely, supported people patiently and asked permission before entering bedrooms or helping with personal care.
“We saw staff knocking on doors and asking for permission before entering people's rooms.” from the report
Activities and community links
People took part in activities suited to their interests, including outings, leisure activities, day services and work.
“People were able to take part in a variety of activities to suit their personal needs and wishes.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider used regular quality visits, audits, meetings and questionnaires to gather views and identify actions.
“The registered provider carried out a monthly quality assurance visit.” from the report
End-of-life planning
minorEnd-of-life care plans had not been written for people living at the home. The manager said this topic had not been discussed because it could be upsetting.
“End of life care plans were not in place for people who used the service.” from the report
- 01How would you discuss and record my relative's end-of-life wishes if they wanted to talk about them?
- 02How often are care plans reviewed, and how are changes in my relative's needs recorded?
- 03How do you make sure medicines records remain accurate and up to date?
- 04How are staffing levels maintained when permanent staff are absent?
- 05How can my relative choose activities and raise concerns in a way they understand?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says the home improved from Requires Improvement overall and in Safe and Well-led at the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 November 2010.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.