CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Stanley Park
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Stanley Park was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found staffing, person-centred care, the environment and oversight needed improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 16 May 2023 and reviewed Safe and Well-led. They spoke with 16 people, 8 relatives and 12 staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was not always safe or well-led. Inspectors found there were not enough staff, or staff were not always deployed effectively. People did not always receive enough conversation, stimulation or person-centred care. Some parts of the building showed wear and tear, and there was an odour in some areas.
Medicines were mostly managed safely, but records for medicines given when needed did not always contain enough information. Risks were assessed and managed, recruitment checks were completed properly, and infection control training and protective equipment use were effective.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, changing from Good at the previous inspection in September 2017. The home breached Regulation 17 on good governance because its systems did not identify or act on several problems quickly enough.
Risk management
Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, with staff taking action to reduce avoidable harm.
“Risks were managed to ensure people were kept safe and staff took action to mitigate the risk of avoidable harm.” from the report
Safe recruitment
The home followed its recruitment processes correctly.
“The provider had processes in place to ensure the safe recruitment of staff and these had been correctly followed.” from the report
Infection control
Staff had infection control training and used protective equipment safely and effectively.
“Staff had received training in infection control practices and used personal protective equipment (PPE) effectively and safely.” from the report
Working with professionals
Staff communicated with other professionals to help understand and meet people's needs.
“Staff communicated with a range of professionals to ensure that people's needs were considered and understood so that they could access the support they needed.” from the report
Staffing and attention
seriousInspectors found there were not enough staff, or staff were not deployed effectively. This meant people did not always receive timely care or enough social and emotional support.
“There were insufficient staff and staff were not appropriately deployed to support people in a safe, timely and person-centred way.” from the report
Person-centred care
needs fixingCare was often focused on completing tasks. Some people were left sitting quietly without enough engagement or stimulation.
“Care was task-centred rather than person-centred. People were not all engaged or stimulated.” from the report
Environment
needs fixingSome areas showed wear and tear and had an odour. The environment also did not provide enough visual or sensory support for people living with dementia.
“However, not all areas of the home were well-maintained, and there were some signs of wear and tear to the premises.” from the report
Management oversight
seriousAudits and governance systems did not identify or address several problems quickly enough. This included issues with staffing, care records, medicines records, infection control and the environment.
“The provider did not have effective systems in place to effectively monitor and improve the quality of the service to ensure positive outcomes for people.” from the report
When-needed medicines
needs fixingSome people did not have complete protocols explaining when medicines prescribed for use when needed should be given.
“Protocols for the use of 'when required' medicines were not all available for people, where they had been prescribed.” from the report
- 01How many staff are currently working on each floor, and how do you make sure staff are available when people need them?
- 02What has changed since the inspection to give residents more conversation, activities, drinks and social stimulation?
- 03What refurbishment or cleaning work has been completed to deal with wear, tear and odours?
- 04How do you now make sure every person has a clear protocol for medicines given when needed?
- 05What actions are in the provider's improvement plan, and how will families be told whether they have been completed?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection and used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 June 2023 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 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, clean surroundings and no visiting restrictions.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 12 September 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during COVID-19, and on whether staffing pressures were affecting care.
The inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. Staff had infection control training, used protective equipment correctly and could get advice. Some staff had extra roles as infection control champions.
The home was clean and tidy, with enhanced cleaning. There were no restrictions on visiting, although wearing a face mask in shared areas was encouraged.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a full rating across all five areas.
Trained staff
Staff had infection control training and used protective equipment correctly. Some staff had extra training and helped promote good practice.
“Staff had completed IPC training and used PPE correctly.” from the report
Clean home
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy, with enhanced cleaning practices to help manage infections.
“The home was clean and tidy throughout.” from the report
Visiting remained open
There were no restrictions on visiting at the time of the inspection. Face masks were encouraged in shared areas.
“There were no restrictions on visiting the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place if COVID-19 or other infection-related staff pressures affect staffing?
- 02Which staff are the current infection control champions, and how do they help maintain good practice?
- 03What are the current visiting arrangements, including whether visitors are asked or encouraged to wear masks?
- 04How would the home respond if an infection outbreak occurred?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 October 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.
Every inspection of Stanley Park
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- June 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 October 2011.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.