CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parkside Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed infection risks through testing, vaccination checks, personal protective equipment, cleaning, ventilation and plans for outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Parkside Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection-control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 January 2022. The inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
They found good practice in how the home supported safe visits and activities outside the home. There were testing arrangements, personal protective equipment, social distancing measures and plans for safely admitting people from hospital.
The home was clean and had regular cleaning schedules. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including staff vaccination, testing, protective equipment and plans for preventing or managing an outbreak.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Safe visiting
Visitors were given testing information and were supported to visit safely. The home also offered video calls when in-person visits were not possible.
“Visitors were supported to test for Covid 19 prior to entry.” from the report
Support for activities
People were supported to continue activities outside the home while reducing infection risks, including transport support and testing when they returned.
“The home had responded to peoples' choices and individual needs during the pandemic, to help them carry out activities outside the home safely.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean, with scheduled cleaning and extra cleaning of high-risk areas. Its layout and ventilation supported infection control.
“The premises looked clean and hygienic throughout. There were cleaning schedules in place.” from the report
Prepared for outbreaks
The home had plans to isolate people and allocate specific staff if an outbreak occurred. Inspectors were assured that infection outbreaks could be prevented or managed.
“There has been no outbreak at the home since the start of the pandemic but procedures are in place to lock down the home” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visiting arrangements and testing managed now?
- 02How would you support my relative if they needed to isolate after coming from hospital?
- 03What plans are in place if there is an infection outbreak or staff shortages?
- 04How often are high-risk areas cleaned, and how do you check that this is done?
- 05What are the current staffing levels and how would COVID-19-related staff pressures affect care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 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, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, but activities and stimulation were not always enough.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They also observed care and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine support, suitable training, personalised care plans and good support with food, health care and consent.
The main shortfall was in activities. Some people who did not join group activities were left without stimulation for long periods. Inspectors made a recommendation about providing more meaningful activities for people living with dementia.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement, published in May 2018. Inspectors found improvements had been made and said the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Safe staffing
People and relatives said there were enough staff, and inspectors saw staff available when support was needed.
“There were enough staff to support people with their physical and emotional needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, histories and cultural or religious requirements. People and relatives were involved in care decisions.
“Care plans were personalised and contained information about people's care needs and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People and their relatives told us they received good care from a kind and caring staff team.” from the report
Improved leadership
Inspectors found that the manager and provider had made and sustained improvements since the previous inspection. Audits and meetings were used to monitor the service.
“The registered manager had developed and sustained improvements at the service since the last inspection.” from the report
Limited stimulation
needs fixingSome people who did not take part in group activities were left without activities or other stimulation for much of the day. Inspectors recommended finding out more about meaningful activities for people living with dementia.
“However, we saw that people who chose not to take part in these activities, were left without any stimulation for long periods of time.” from the report
- 01What individual activities are available now for people who do not want to join group activities?
- 02How do you provide meaningful stimulation for people living with dementia?
- 03How do you check that there are enough staff at different times of day to meet people's needs?
- 04How are relatives involved when care plans or people's needs change?
- 05How do you monitor medicines and check that staff remain competent to administer them?
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating and covered all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 July 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 Parkside Residential Home
6 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: Requires improvement
- August 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 June 2017.
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 Enfield
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. 79 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Over the time he spent with them he got to know our parents very well and became like part of the family, even joining in family celebrations.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.