CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parklands
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about visitors, distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing and managing outbreaks. They were only somewhat assured about the policy, high-touch cleaning records and staff changing clothes.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection controls but gaps in staff risk assessments, cleaning records and changing clothes.
This was a targeted inspection on 5 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. The visit was announced.
The home had appointment-only visits through a separate entrance. Visitors were tested and wore full personal protective equipment. Staff used protective equipment, and testing, social distancing and admissions were handled safely.
Inspectors found some weaknesses. Staff did not have individual COVID-19 risk assessments. High-touch cleaning was not recorded on cleaning schedules, and staff did not routinely change clothes at the start and end of shifts as the home's policy required.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Controlled visiting
Visitors used a separate entrance, had appointments, were tested and wore full protective equipment.
“A visitor room was available on an appointment basis.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors found that protective equipment was available and used safely by staff and visitors.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Safe professional visits
A separate office near the entrance was cleaned after each use, helping visiting professionals provide treatment while limiting contact.
“This meant professionals could ensure people received necessary treatment whilst limiting contact with others.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
Inspectors were assured that the home tested people and staff and had measures to prevent or manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Staff risk assessments
needs fixingStaff had not been individually assessed for COVID-19 risks and needs. Inspectors were only somewhat assured that the infection control policy was up to date.
“Staff were not risk assessed to consider COVID-19 and their individual needs.” from the report
High-touch cleaning records
needs fixingExtra cleaning of high-touch areas was not recorded on cleaning schedules. This made it harder for the manager to check that the cleaning had been done.
“Enhanced cleaning, including high touch areas, was not recorded on cleaning schedules.” from the report
Changing clothes between shifts
needs fixingStaff were not routinely changing clothes at the beginning and end of shifts, despite the home's own policy.
“Staff were not routinely getting changed at the beginning and end of their shift.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now had individual COVID-19 risk assessments, and how are these kept up to date?
- 02How do you record cleaning of high-touch areas, and who checks the records?
- 03Do staff now change clothes at the beginning and end of every shift, as the home's policy requires?
- 04What changes were made to the entrance foyer signs and how are visitors told about COVID-19 measures?
- 05How do you check that protective equipment, testing and visiting arrangements remain effective?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staff training and recruitment records to improve.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 15 April 2019. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, a visitor, staff and the registered manager. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, training and management records.
The home was providing personal care to 23 people aged 65 and over. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care. Staff understood people's histories, needs and preferences, and visitors were welcomed.
People received suitable food and drinks, help to access health services and support to stay independent. The home had good systems for medicines, safeguarding, complaints and learning from incidents.
All five CQC questions were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found the legal requirements were met and that the service was consistently providing good care, although some improvements were still identified.
Personalised care
Staff took time to understand people's life histories, preferences and individual needs. Care plans were reviewed and updated as needs changed.
“People received care which was responsive to their individual needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described compassionate care. Inspectors saw staff supporting people with dignity, respect and empathy.
“People told us about living at the home and said the staff were kind, caring and attentive to them.” from the report
Safety and medicines
Staff understood safeguarding and people's risks. Medicines were stored, given and disposed of using safe procedures.
“Medicines systems were organised and people were receiving their medicines when they should.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, take positive risks and remain as independent as possible. Their views were listened to.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible” from the report
Moving and handling training
needs fixingThe manager's qualification to deliver moving and handling training had not been refreshed. The manager could not be sure they had up-to-date knowledge, so an external provider was to be used until this was done.
“The registered manager could not be assured they had the necessary up to date knowledge to deliver this training effectively.” from the report
Morning staffing
minorInspectors found there were enough staff, but the provider was recruiting more staff for mornings so people's needs could be met without delay.
“The provider was looking to increase the number of staff in the morning to ensure people's needs were met without delay.” from the report
Recruitment records
minorRecruitment checks were in place, but records needed clearer written explanations for gaps in employment histories.
“The registered manager noted the improvements needed to ensure there was a written explanation of any gaps in employment history.” from the report
- 01Has the manager's moving and handling training qualification now been refreshed, and who delivers this training?
- 02Have more morning staff been recruited, and are people now receiving support without delay at busy times?
- 03How does the home record and check explanations for gaps in applicants' employment histories?
- 04How are changes in people's needs recorded and shared with all staff?
- 05How are people's suggestions and complaints followed up and used to improve the home?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 June 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 Parklands
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 August 2015.
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 Worcestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.