Valley Park Care Home

Updated 7 October 2020

The inspection

This was a targeted inspection to check whether the provider had met the requirements of the specific concerns we had about staffing levels, medicines management and the provider’s audit processes. We will assess all of the key question at the next comprehensive inspection of the service.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

This inspection was undertaken by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Valley Park Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with 7 members of staff including the registered manager and deputy manager

We reviewed a range of records, including medication administration records (MAR’s), care records, as well as information relating to the health and safety and management and oversight of the service.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 7 October 2020

About the service:

Valley Park Care Home is a residential home that was providing accommodation and personal care to 42 people at the time of the inspection. Some people who used the service were living with dementia.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service had significantly improved since the previous inspection and almost all feedback had been robustly addressed before we came to inspect. The provider had appointed a new manager, who was experienced and committed in continuing to raise standards at the service. Staff told us the new manager was approachable and organised. People and their visitors recognised the service had improved.

People told us there were sufficient numbers of staff to keep people safe but staff were sometimes rushed providing support. The manager responded to feedback and by day two of the inspection they had increased the staffing provision at the service. We have made a recommendation about considering the views of people, visitors and staff, when making decisions about the service.

People told us they received safe, caring support at the service. People received their medicines when they needed them, and there were systems in place to ensure people were protected against the risk of abuse. We identified minor improvements were required to ensure people’s medicines were always stored under optimal conditions, which was fedback to the manager. The premises were clean and there was good infection control practice in place. There was a friendly atmosphere at Valley Park Care Home, and we saw people looked well cared for.

People’s needs were assessed, and care was planned and delivered in a person-centred way, in line with legislation and guidance. Staff knew people and their needs well, and we saw caring interventions and conversations throughout our inspection, albeit these were sometimes task-led. People said they enjoyed their meals and their dietary needs and preferences were met.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. When people were unable to make their own decisions about their care and support, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were followed.

The manager conducted audits and checks to further ensure the quality of care and support provided to people. Some quality assurances processes were either new or in development, so the effectiveness of these checks was relatively untested and needed more time to embed. Complaints and concerns were well managed, and the manager took prompt action to address any minor issues we raised during the inspection.

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement (report published in November 2018). The service had improved at this inspection. The key areas of ‘effective’ and ‘responsive’ improved from requires improvement to good; the key area ‘well-led’ improved from inadequate to requires improvement.

Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we are scheduled to return. We inspect according to a schedule based on the current rating, however may inspect sooner if we receive information of concern.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk