Archived: Valley Park Care Home

Updated 23 March 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Before the inspection, the registered provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the home. We contacted the local authority and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

The inspection visit took place on 8 and 13 November 2017 and was unannounced. On day one of our inspection the team consisted of two adult social care inspectors and two experts by experience with a background in older people. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Day two of our inspection was unannounced and was carried out by two adult social care inspectors.

We spoke with a total of 15 people who lived in the home as well as four relatives who were visiting the home at the time of our inspection. We also spoke with the regional manager, the head of quality and governance, 11 members of staff and four visiting professionals. We observed care interactions in communal areas of the home. We spent some time looking at the documents and records that related to people’s care and the management of the service. We looked at four people’s care plans in full and a further two care plans regarding specific areas of care. We spoke with a visiting health professional.

Updated 23 March 2018

This was our first inspection of Valley Park Care home under the registered provider’s registration with the Care Quality Commission.

Valley Park Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Valley Park Care Home is registered to provide residential accommodation for older people, including those with dementia, for up to 57 people. The home is located in Wombwell near Barnsley. On day one of our inspection we were told 39 people were living at the home. On day two there were 38 people living at Valley Park Care Home.

At the time of our inspection the manager was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC), although they were unavailable on both days of our inspection. 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.

Care plans were found to be person-centred, although the content about people’s care needs was not consistently recorded which meant people were at risk of receiving unsafe care. Risks to people were not appropriately managed as personal emergency evacuation plans were not sufficiently detailed and not all staff were familiar with what to do in the event of a fire. The use of thickeners in people’s drinks was not safe as staff were not following the prescriber’s instructions.

Medicines were not stored in accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines. Protocols for the use of ‘as required’ medicines were not always in place and examples we saw required further detail. Medicines were not given at times specified within the instructions for use. The recording of the use of topical creams required improvement.

Mental capacity assessments were not decision specific and we found they were in place for people who were deemed to have capacity. This demonstrated a misunderstanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). The recording of relevant people who held Lasting Power of Attorney was unclear. Staff were aware of the importance of gaining consent to care and knew what to do if people refused care. We saw people being offered choice in their daily routines.

People enjoyed the meals they were offered and we observed a positive dining experience. Assistive equipment was in place to support people to maintain their independence, although the registered provider was unable to demonstrate how they met the accessible information standard.

Staff were able to describe how they maintained people’s privacy and dignity and people told us this happened. However, we saw one example where this was not respected.

Complaints were recorded, although details of investigations and outcomes were not held which meant the registered provider could not demonstrate this process was effective.

People told us the provision of activities had been limited due to the activities coordinator being unavailable for several weeks. Instead, care staff provided activities, although some people told us this was repetitive. External entertainers were visiting this service.

People and relatives provided mixed feedback about staffing levels. The registered provider had recently increased day staffing levels and rotas showed shifts were usually fully covered.

Recruitment processes were found to be safely managed. People told us they felt safe living at this service and said they were supported by suitably skilled staff. Staff receiving training and formal support through regular supervision and appraisals.

Staff with learning difficulties were able to access employment opportunities and people were supported to maintain their religious beliefs. This demonstrated the provider’s commitment to equality, diversity and human rights.

People, relatives and visiting professionals were complimentary about the care provided by staff. We witnessed positive interactions between people and staff in a friendly environment.

Not all incidents which were notifiable to the Care Quality Commission had been reported to us. We dealt with this outside of the inspection process.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.