Parker House Nursing Home

Ratings

• Overall

  Good

• Safe

  Good

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Parker House Nursing Home is a ‘residential care home’ providing nursing and personal care and support to older and younger adults some of whom were living with dementia. At the time of the assessment, the service was supporting 19 people. Parker House Nursing Home was last rated Requires Improvement (published 23 January 2024). The report was published following CQC’s old inspection approach using key lines of enquiry (KLOEs), prompts and ratings characteristics. During that inspection we found issues relating to the safety of the service, management and environment. During this assessment we found improvements had been made. This assessment has been completed following the Care Quality Commission (CQC) new approach to assessment; Single Assessment Framework (SAF). We carried out our on-site assessment on 02 April 2024. This was an unannounced assessment, which means the provider was not told an assessment was going to be starting beforehand. During this assessment we looked at 14 quality statements; Learning Culture, Safeguarding; Involving people to manage risks; Safe and effective staffing; Medicines Optimisation; Infection prevention and control; Safe environments; Assessing needs; Supporting people to live healthier lives; Person-centred care; Listening to and involving people; Shared direction and culture; Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders and Governance, management and sustainability. We assessed some but not all quality statements at this visit which means we use the ratings from the previous inspection to rate the key questions of effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

People's experience of this service

People told us they felt safe living at Parker House. People told us staff were kind and caring, but some communicated better than others. Staff knew how to safeguard people from abuse and neglect. People were mostly supported in line with assessed needs. Risk reduction measures were in place to protect people from the risk of avoidable harm, however there was an inconsistent approach to how risks were highlighted and managed. People told us, there were enough staff to support them, however some people were supported quicker than others. People’s health needs were managed, and staff took action to ensure people saw healthcare professionals when needed. Staff were kind however we received inconsistent feedback about communication. People and their relatives told us care was person-centred. The registered manager was visible and kind. Governance systems needed further development to drive service improvement, People told us the management team were approachable and would act on concerns raised.