CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parkview
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home managed infection risks, including visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment and outbreaks. This was a targeted review of infection prevention and control only.
- 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 10 March 2021. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control measures, including how the home managed COVID-19 risks.
Inspectors found policies covering COVID-19, regular testing, safe admissions, visitor arrangements and the use of protective equipment. Staff were seen using protective equipment properly, and enough supplies were available.
The home was marked 'Inspected but not rated'. This means the visit did not provide a new overall quality rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visits were planned and controlled. Visitors were screened, tested and required to use a designated area that was disinfected after each visit.
“Visits were held in a designated area which was disinfected after each use.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had enough masks, gloves, aprons and face shields, with equipment stations around the building. Inspectors saw staff using protective equipment appropriately.
“We saw that the service had enough personal protective equipment (PPE) in stock, including face masks, gloves, aprons and face shields.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
People and staff were tested regularly in line with national guidance. Some staff and people had received a first vaccine dose at the time of the inspection.
“The service had arrangements in place to test people and staff regularly for COVID-19 in line with current national guidance.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home had procedures for admitting new people, including testing and a 14-day isolation period after moving in.
“The service had appropriate procedures in place to admit new people which followed current national guidance on testing them for COVID-19 and implementing a 14-day isolation period from the time they moved in.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now for visitors?
- 02How are people and staff currently tested when there is a suspected or confirmed infection?
- 03What protective equipment is available, and how do you check that staff use it correctly?
- 04What is the current process for admitting someone new, including testing and isolation?
- 05What is the home's current overall rating and when was the last full inspection?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was inspected but not rated and did not assess all five questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 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, October 2019
Parkview was rated Good in all areas; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some records and cleanliness improvements needed.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over three days. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files, complaints and other management records.
The home supported 63 people living with dementia. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and dignity, and supported to make choices. Staff understood people's needs, medicines were managed safely, and people received suitable food, drinks and healthcare.
There were some areas to improve. Records about consent and best-interest decisions were not always complete or signed, and inspectors recommended that the home review its practice under the Mental Capacity Act. The home was generally clean, but people, relatives and staff said more could be done, and an action plan had recently been started.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published in April 2017.
Protection from harm
Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff knew how to report concerns and risks were assessed with plans to manage them.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and respect. They supported privacy, dignity and independence during daily care.
“People were supported by staff who were kind, caring and respectful towards them.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to take part in activities suited to their interests, including music, games, trips, animals and community visits.
“People were supported to participate in activities of their interest and stimulated in ways that were socially relevant and suitable to their needs.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People were supported to eat and drink enough, with specialist advice used where needed. They also had access to GPs and other health professionals.
“People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts for their health and wellbeing.” from the report
Mental Capacity Act records
needs fixingRecords of consent and best-interest decisions were not always signed or clear about who had been involved. The inspectors recommended that the home review its practice.
“We recommend that the service consider current guidance on MCA 2005 and update their practice accordingly.” from the report
Cleanliness
needs fixingThe home was generally clean, but people, relatives and staff said more could be done. The home had recently created an action plan to improve cleanliness.
“The home was generally clean; however, people, their relatives and staff said more could be done to improve the level of cleanliness in the home.” from the report
Meal information
minorThere was no menu available for people. Meals available at each mealtime were written on a board instead.
“There was no menu in place for people, at each mealtime, available meals were written on a board for people to refer to.” from the report
- 01How have you improved the recording of consent and best-interest decisions since this inspection?
- 02What actions were included in the cleanliness action plan, and have they all been completed?
- 03How do you decide how many staff are needed on each shift, and how do you maintain continuity when shifts are vacant?
- 04How will my relative's communication needs, interests and preferred activities be recorded and reviewed?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care planning and decisions about end-of-life wishes?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home itself. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 October 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 Parkview
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Bexley
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 £1,250 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.