CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parkdale Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines practices, updated risk assessments and systems for learning from incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reflected in care plans. Staff had suitable training, people were supported with food and drink, and the home worked with health professionals.
- Caring?
- Requires improvement
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager had systems for reviewing incidents, monitoring care and checking medicines, care plans, mealtimes, equipment and the premises. Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Parkdale Care Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found good progress in safety, effectiveness and leadership, but two areas were not inspected.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 02 November 2022. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files, training records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found enough safely recruited staff, safe medicines management, updated risk assessments, suitable care planning and improved checks on the quality of care.
The overall rating remains Requires Improvement because Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit. Their previous ratings were used instead. The home had been rated Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, but inspectors said it was no longer in breach of the regulations covered by this inspection.
Safety planning
Risk assessments were reviewed regularly and after incidents. Staff could explain how they followed people's individual safety plans.
“Risk assessments were reviewed on a monthly basis and when incidents or accidents happened and were updated to reflect any changes.” from the report
Medicines
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Records were accurate and medicines were stored safely.
“Medicines administration records were in place and accurately completed.” from the report
Choice and consent
People's capacity was assessed when needed, and staff understood how to support decisions in people's best interests. Staff sought consent before providing care.
“People had their capacity assessed and where needed a decision was taken in their best interests.” from the report
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were completed before staff started work.
“People were supported by enough safely recruited staff.” from the report
Person-centred care
People and relatives said care reflected individual preferences. Staff knew people's likes, dislikes, culture and religion.
“People and their relatives told us they received care which was person centred.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What actions are still needed to improve the overall rating from Requires Improvement?
- 02What were the latest ratings and findings for Caring and Responsive, which were not inspected during this visit?
- 03How will you make sure risk assessments and care plans are updated promptly after accidents or other incidents?
- 04How do you monitor Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards reviews and make sure applications are made on time?
- 05What further improvements are planned for the home and how will residents be involved in deciding them?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 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, August 2022
Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks from poor incident reporting, incomplete care guidance and weak checks on safety and consent.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 July 2022. The inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They looked at 12 people's care records and records about how the home was managed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were also rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that some incidents and injuries were not investigated or reported, and care records did not always explain how to manage people's risks.
People were generally positive about staff and the care they received. Medicines were given safely, staffing levels appeared sufficient, the home was clean and people could access food, drinks and health professionals.
The home had improved its environment since the previous inspection. However, the home remained in breach of regulations. The provider was required to send an action plan, and inspectors said they would monitor progress.
Medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were given safely and as prescribed. Staff stayed with people while they took their medicines.
“Medicines were administered to people in a safe way.” from the report
Staffing
People, relatives and staff said there were enough staff. Inspectors saw staff respond to requests for support without people having to wait.
“There were enough staff available to support people.” from the report
Food and drinks
People had a choice of meals, regular drinks and support to eat and drink when needed. Fluid monitoring was recorded where required.
“When needed people received support to eat and drink and staff took time with people and this was not rushed.” from the report
Improvements to the building
The home had made improvements to furniture, flooring, decoration and some bedrooms. Environmental checks and a maintenance action plan were in place.
“Improvements had been made to the environment including new furniture and floor coverings.” from the report
Incidents and injuries
seriousSome allegations, unexplained injuries and accidents were not investigated or reported to safeguarding teams. This meant inspectors could not be assured that people were protected from harm.
“People had not always been protected from potential abuse. This placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
Risk records and call systems
seriousRisk assessments and care plans were sometimes missing, inconsistent or not updated after incidents. Inspectors also found call bells and sensor mats that did not work or were unplugged.
“This meant people were not always able to call for assistance when needed.” from the report
Consent and restrictions
seriousThe home did not always complete individual capacity assessments or best-interests decisions. Records about DoLS authorisations were incomplete, and staff did not consistently understand how to support people.
“The principles of MCA were not understood or followed within the home.” from the report
Management checks
seriousThe provider's audits did not reliably identify problems with care plans, incidents, DoLS records or call systems. This was a continuing governance concern from the previous inspection.
“Systems in place were not robust to ensure people were protected from harm.” from the report
Infection control guidance
needs fixingInspectors saw staff wearing masks incorrectly. The infection control policy was not up to date and referred to another care home and older guidance.
“We were not assured that the provider was using personal protective equipment (PPE) effectively and safely.” from the report
- 01How do you now investigate and report accidents, unexplained injuries and safeguarding allegations?
- 02How often are call bells and sensor mats checked, and what happens if they fail?
- 03How do you record individual capacity assessments and best-interests decisions?
- 04Which residents have DoLS authorisations, and how do you check that authorisations have not expired?
- 05What action has been completed in response to the warning notices and the latest CQC action plan?
This was an unannounced inspection prompted by concerns about the environment, staffing and people's care; the report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led, but not separate ratings for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 August 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.
Every inspection of Parkdale Care Home
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- November 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 July 2021.
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 Wolverhampton
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“Knowing Mum was in Corina's care made an enormous difference to us and we knew she was in safe hands.”
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.