CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parkview House Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention measures, protective equipment, testing, admissions and outbreak management were being handled safely. They made some minor suggestions and noted that extra hand-sanitising dispensers were installed after the visit.
- 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, March 2022
Parkview House Residential Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, but staffing pressures had affected some visiting.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 1 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control during a significant COVID-19 outbreak. They also checked staffing pressures and visiting arrangements, including speaking by telephone with eight relatives.
Inspectors were assured that staff used protective equipment safely, infection risks were managed, and people were admitted and tested safely. Staff had infection control training. Extra hand-sanitising dispensers were installed after the visit, and inspectors made some minor suggestions about infection control.
A recent outbreak had created staffing pressures, with agency staff and managers covering rota gaps. Visiting had not been facilitated on Sundays for some time because of staff deployment. The report says this had been resolved by the time it was written.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating or a rating for the other four areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks well during the outbreak.
“We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines.” from the report
Use of protective equipment
Staff had infection control training and were using protective equipment safely and effectively.
“Staff received training in infection control and were using PPE safely and effectively.” from the report
Outbreak arrangements
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Family views of care
Relatives spoken to praised the care provided, although they also raised concerns about how cautiously visiting was managed.
“Relatives praised the excellent care provided at the service but many encouraged a less cautious approach to risk management of the pandemic.” from the report
Staffing pressure affected visiting
needs fixingStaffing pressures meant Sunday visits had not been facilitated for some time. The report says this had been resolved by the time it was written.
“However, due to staff deployment, visiting had not been facilitated at the service on a Sunday for some time.” from the report
Staffing gaps during the outbreak
needs fixingThe recent outbreak meant agency staff and management team members were needed to cover rota gaps. Ask how this affected care and whether staffing is now stable.
“The pressures of a recent outbreak of COVID-19 meant regular agency staff and management team members were required to back fill gaps in rotas.” from the report
- 01Are Sunday and weekend visits now available as expected, and what arrangements are in place if staffing pressures return?
- 02How many agency staff or management staff are currently being used to cover rota gaps?
- 03What minor infection control suggestions did inspectors make, and what has the home changed in response?
- 04How are protective equipment, testing and hand sanitising managed now that the outbreak has passed?
- 05How does the home make visiting flexible while keeping infection risks under control?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, staffing pressures and visiting arrangements; it did not rate the other four areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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 2018
Parkview House Residential Care Home was rated Good overall, but Safe requires improvement because staffing levels were not always enough.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 May 2018. Inspectors and experts by experience spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, the building, complaints and quality checks.
People generally said they felt safe and that staff were kind. Inspectors found good care planning, safe recruitment, suitable training, safe medicines management and good support with health needs. Care was described as person-centred, and the home offered activities and good end of life care.
The main concern was staffing. Night staffing had been reduced and there was no floating member of staff to provide extra help. The provider increased night staffing the day after the inspection, but inspectors also recommended a review of staffing levels at other times. There were also concerns about infection control, learning from falls and some aspects of the building.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement, so families should pay particular attention to staffing and the improvements promised.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people patiently and with kindness. People, relatives and professionals also spoke positively about the staff's approach.
“We saw many kind and caring interactions between staff and people living at the service.” from the report
Detailed care planning
Care records covered people's health, mobility, personal care, cognition, mental health, routines and preferences. Key workers helped staff understand people's individual needs.
“Care records were detailed, up to date and covered a wide range of needs including people's mobility, personal care needs, cognition and mental health.” from the report
End of life care
The home had detailed end of life care plans and worked with families and health professionals. Inspectors noted repeated Gold Standard Framework accreditation.
“The latest award was at the highest level possible.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home and provider carried out audits covering areas such as medicines, the environment and care plans. Actions were recorded in a service improvement plan.
“Quality audits took place at both a service and provider level.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousNight staffing was not enough to meet people's needs at the time of inspection. Relatives and staff also raised concerns about busy periods, weekends and times when people needed two staff.
“At this inspection we found the staffing levels had been reduced at night and there was no longer a floating staff member to offer support if a person was unwell, or needed two people to care for them.” from the report
Learning from falls
seriousThe home responded to individual falls, but had not used the pattern of falls to decide whether staffing arrangements at busy times needed to change.
“This showed us the service had not addressed the question as to whether falls could be reduced by utilising staff differently, or indeed there were enough staff to care for people safely at busy times.” from the report
Infection control and cleanliness
needs fixingSome communal bathrooms did not have suitable bins for used hand towels. Inspectors also found smells of urine and furniture that was difficult to keep clean.
“Although the service had systems in place to check the service was clean throughout we found there were some issues with infection control.” from the report
Dignity and bathroom design
needs fixingThe position of communal toilets opening from living rooms could leave people exposed or distressed. Improvements to the bathroom design were planned.
“The location of the toilet off the living room was not ideal, and there was a malodour on occasion from the toilet.” from the report
Activities and equipment
minorSome people wanted more activities, and inspectors found that smaller lounges did not always have enough games or sensory items available.
“There was not always a range of games or sensory items for use in the smaller lounges that people could play with when they wanted.” from the report
- 01How many staff are now working on each unit at night, and is there still a floating member of staff available across the clusters?
- 02What changes have been made to staffing at weekends, during staff breaks and at busy times such as people getting up or going to bed?
- 03What have you learned from the pattern of falls, and how have staffing or working arrangements changed as a result?
- 04Have the communal bathroom bins, hand-drying arrangements, smells, carpets and furniture been improved since the inspection?
- 05What activities and sensory or reminiscence equipment are available in the smaller lounges now?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five key questions, care, records, medicines, staffing, the building, complaints and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 July 2018 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 House Residential Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Parkview House Residential Care Home →
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Parkview House Residential Care Home →
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 August 2013.
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.