Archived: Parkview House

This inspection took place on 6, 11, and 12 July 2016 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in December 2014 we found one breach relating to the management of medicines. We found improvements had been made at this inspection.

A manager was in post who was in the process of becoming registered. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The provider had systems in place to ensure the safe management and administration of medicines. We found staff knew how to report concerns or abuse. Risk assessments were carried out and management plans put in place to enable people to receive safe care. There were effective and up to date systems in place to check and maintain the safety of the premises. We found there were enough staff working to meet people’s needs.

Staff received support through regular supervisions, appraisals and training opportunities. Appropriate applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for and authorised. People had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their day-to-day health needs.

People were offered a choice of nutritious food and drink. Staff knew the people they were supporting including their preferences to ensure a personalised service was provided. People and their relatives thought staff were caring. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and enabled people to maintain their independence. A variety of activities were offered which included trips outside of the home. The service dealt with complaints in accordance with their policy and timescales.

The provider held regular meetings for staff and for people and their relatives. People and their relatives were given the opportunity to complete satisfaction surveys. The provider had quality assurance systems in place to identify areas for improvement.

We found that people were assessed individually for the risk of them falling and where appropriate, falls prevention plans were in place. Each person had a history of falls log and referrals were made to a specialist falls clinic if the cause of falls was not known. Staff, including night staff, were trained in moving and handling people. One person told us they felt safe and that "on the whole, staff are quite thoughtful."

We found that appropriate testing and maintenance was carried out to ensure equipment was safe and suitable for those using it. There was a nurse call system that people could use to summon staff in emergencies.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs and the home had arrangements in place to provide emergency staff cover where required. Night staff were able to access training, supervision and staff meetings.

We found that people's views, experiences, independence and dignity were respected. People told us they had involvement and choice in their care and we found people had opportunities to express their views. One person said "I get up when I want to and if I am not ready they leave me to lie in.'

We found the home had processes to safeguard people from abuse. Staff told us how they would deal with suspected abuse. People and their relatives knew how to report concerns. There were processes in place to deal with and follow up complaints.

We found the home was generally clean and tidy, although some areas required deep-cleaning. There were cleaning schedules in place and staff were aware of their cleaning responsibilities.

People told us 'the staff are all very nice. They are good to you and help' and 'they are all very friendly; they treat me well.' Staff told us they were treated well. We found evidence that staff had relevant qualifications and experience and that the stated staffing levels were met.