CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Parton House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Parton House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with refurbishment still under way.
This was an unannounced inspection on 20 and 21 February 2018. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff, managers and health and social care professionals. The inspector also reviewed care and medicines records, recruitment and training records, and quality checks.
The home had improved since its last comprehensive inspection in December 2016, when it was rated Requires Improvement overall. Inspectors found people received personalised care and were treated with kindness and respect. Medicines, staffing, safeguarding, nutrition and health care were managed safely.
The home was being refurbished during the inspection. Inspectors found activities, care planning, complaints handling and end of life support were responsive to people's needs. They also found an open manager and systems to monitor quality and learn from mistakes.
The overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. This means inspectors found the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection, but it does not mean that every aspect was perfect.
Improved care
The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous comprehensive inspection to Good overall. Inspectors said improvements had been sustained.
“At this inspection we found the service had improved to Good overall.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed positive relationships and found that staff respected people's dignity, privacy, rights and independence.
“People were treated with kindness and care. Staff respected their dignity and their human rights.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from activities such as films, quizzes, singing, fitness sessions and walks. Local schoolchildren and community members also visited.
“People were encouraged to join in with a range of activities.” from the report
Support at the end of life
People's end of life wishes were discussed and recorded. The home worked with health professionals and supported relatives sensitively.
“People's end of life wishes had been discussed with them and their relatives.” from the report
Refurbishment was ongoing
minorThe home was undergoing major refurbishment during the inspection. Some areas had been upgraded, but further work was planned, including replacing carpets and improving the gardens.
“People lived in a home which was undergoing major refurbishments.” from the report
Some training remained due
minorTraining records showed that a number of staff still had training to complete. The manager was monitoring this and discussing how it would be completed.
“This record indicated a number of staff had training to complete.” from the report
- 01Which refurbishment work is still outstanding, and how will it affect my relative's room, activities and daily routine?
- 02Which staff training was still incomplete at the inspection, and has it now been completed?
- 03How will you assess and review my relative's care needs if their health, mobility, nutrition or dementia-related needs change?
- 04What activities would be suitable for my relative, including if they prefer to stay in their room?
- 05How will my family be involved in care reviews and decisions about end of life wishes?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with ratings given for all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 March 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, effective and responsive care, but dignity during hoisting and quality checks still needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection over two days on 8 and 9 December 2016. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment, complaints, accidents and quality checks, and observed care.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Responsive. Inspectors found enough suitably checked staff, safer medicines systems, support with food and health needs, person-centred care records and a range of activities.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Caring and Well-led. Staff were usually kind and attentive, but people were not always covered with blankets when being moved in hoists. Quality checks identified issues but did not consistently record who would fix them, or by when.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. The report says earlier problems with care records, dignity, nutrition and recruitment had been addressed, but further improvements were still needed.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw evidence of recruitment checks. Risks, accidents and emergencies were assessed and managed.
“There were sufficient staff employed with the right skills and knowledge, to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines
New systems were in place to monitor stocks and administration. Medicines were reviewed with people's doctors and as-needed medicines were supported by clear instructions.
“People's medicines had been administered and managed safely.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People's nutritional risks and dietary needs were recorded and monitored. They had access to doctors and other health professionals when needed.
“People's health and well-being was promoted.” from the report
Personalised care and activities
Care plans reflected people's current needs, preferences and abilities. People had activities, access to the garden and support to maintain independence.
“People had access to a range of meaningful activities.” from the report
Improving leadership
The new manager was described as open, accessible and approachable. People, relatives and staff reported improvements in morale, teamwork and care.
“People, their families and staff recognised the improvements which had been made.” from the report
Dignity during hoisting
needs fixingPeople were sometimes moved in hoists without the blankets provided to cover them. Inspectors saw this happen several times and had to prompt staff to use a blanket.
“People were not always shown dignity and respect when being assisted by staff using hoists.” from the report
Quality checks were not fully recorded
needs fixingAudits identified issues but did not consistently record what action was needed, who was responsible or when it should be completed. The report says this made it difficult to show that checks were improving care.
“There was a lack of recorded evidence to show that these monitoring systems improved the quality and safe of the care provided.” from the report
Feedback was not clearly acted on
minorThe home sought feedback, but inspectors found no evidence that this feedback had always led to action.
“Feedback on the service was sought however there was no evidence of this feedback being acted upon.” from the report
Dementia knowledge
needs fixingA health professional said some staff had poor awareness of the needs of people living with dementia. Further dementia training was planned.
“A health care professional said some staff had poor awareness of the needs of people living with dementia.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure people are covered and treated with dignity every time they are moved using a hoist?
- 02How do you record who is responsible for actions found through audits, and when those actions must be completed?
- 03What action has been taken in response to feedback from people and relatives?
- 04What dementia training have staff completed since this inspection, and how is their understanding checked?
- 05How do you make sure staff understand which people have deprivation of liberty safeguards authorisations?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of all five key questions, covering the overall quality and legal requirements of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2017 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 Parton House
6 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 December 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“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.