Parkside (St Helens) Limited

Parkside (St Helens) Limited is a residential care home providing personal care and accommodation for up to 30 people aged 65 and over in one adapted building. There were 22 people living at the home at the time of this inspection.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs. People told us there were enough staff to help them when needed. One person said, “Staff come quickly if I need them.” There was a high proportion of agency staff on duty on the first day of our inspection as many regular staff were absent due to unplanned sickness. Records showed people still received the care and support they needed. Regular staff with good knowledge of the home and the people living there had returned to work by the second day of our inspection.

Some parts of the home were not clean on the first day of our inspection. However, the situation had changed on the second day of the inspection as regular staff, including a cleaner, returned to work and the home was clean throughout. We observed staff following good infection prevention and control practice, such as safe donning, doffing and disposal of personal protective equipment (PPE). People had been supported to self-isolate in their rooms as and when required. The home had a regular testing programme in place for both staff and people living at the home.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. One person commented, “Oh I’m very safe here. I’ve got to know the staff quite well. They’re very kind and caring.” Staff had received safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about their role in recognising and reporting safeguarding concerns.

Although the registered provider had sufficient oversight of the home, we found communication with key stakeholders was sometimes inconsistent. We have made a recommendation to help review and improve contingency planning at the home.

Staff had a positive, committed and caring attitude. Regular staff were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting and spoke fondly about them. People told us staff listened to them and they were approachable. One person said, “Yes I can say if I’m unhappy, staff listen to me. I’ve been here a long time and I’m very happy here.” There were systems in place to gather feedback from people living at the home and their relatives.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 16 January 2019).

Why we inspected

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This inspection began as a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider had in place. In light of our findings the inspection was extended to a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led.

We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those key questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.

The overall rating for the service has remained good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Parkside (St Helens) Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Parkside Care Home is a residential care home that was providing accommodation and personal care to 22 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were protected from abuse and the risk of abuse because staff understood their role and responsibilities for keeping people safe from harm. People told us they felt safe living at the service and family members were confident that their relative was kept safe. Medication was managed safely and people received all their prescribed medication on time. Risks people faced were identified and measures put in place to minimise the risk of harm occurring. People were protected from the risk of the spread of infection because staff followed good infection control practices. The premises and equipment were well maintained, they were kept clean and underwent regular safety checks. People’s needs were met by the right amount of staff who were suitably skilled and experienced.

People’s needs and choices were assessed and planned for. Care plans identified intended outcomes for people and how they were to be met in a way they preferred. Staff were provided with the training they needed for their role. People told us staff did a good job and were well trained and competent at what they did. People received the right care and support to maintain good nutrition and hydration and their healthcare needs were understood and met. People who were able, consented to their care and support. Where people lacked capacity to make their own decisions they were made in their best interest in line with the Mental Capacity Act.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect. People told us staff were kind and respectful and promoted their independence. Staff were knowledgeable about people and used this knowledge with positive outcomes for people. Family members and other visitors were welcomed at the service.

People’s needs were identified and planned for, taking account of their choices and preferences. People received the right care and support in a way they preferred. People and relevant others were provided with information about how to complain and they were confident about complaining should they need to.

The leadership of the service promoted a positive culture that was person centred and inclusive. People, family members and staff understood the management structure of the service and were complementary about the way the service was managed. They told us they were consulted and involved in the running and development of the service. There were effective systems in place for checking on the quality and safety of the service and making improvements.

More information is in Detailed Findings below

Rating at last inspection: Good (Report published 14 April 2016)

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

Parkside Care Home is a residential care home in St. Helens. The service offers accommodation and support for up to 30 older people. There were 26 people living at the service on the day we visited. The building is arranged across two floors with lift, staircase and stair lift access to the upper floor. There are 24 single rooms and three shared rooms. Twenty one rooms have ensuite facilities. Car parking is available at the front of the building.

The registered manager had been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) since January 2011. 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 last inspection of Parkside Care Home was carried out in November 2015 and we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The registered provider had not met the requirements of Regulation 9 Person centred care and Regulation 12 Safe care and treatment and had been served a warning notice for Regulation 17 Good governance. The registered provider developed action plans to address all areas highlighted and these had all been actioned by the day we visited.

People who used the service said they felt safe. Staff knew about the systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm and they also knew how to recognise and respond to allegations of abuse appropriately.

There were sufficient staff on duty to ensure the needs of people were met. Effective recruitment processes were in place and were followed by the service. Staff received on-going training and support to ensure they carried out their role effectively.

Medicines were managed safely and processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. People received care and support from staff that knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s individual needs. People told us staff always treated them well and promoted their choices regarding their care and support. People spoke positively about staff, their comments included, “Staff are supportive and helpful” and “Staff are excellent”.

People’s risks were anticipated, identified and monitored. Staff managed risk effectively and supported people’s decisions, so they had as much control and independence as possible.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We saw that there were policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and DoLS to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected.

People had enough to eat and drink. People were offered drinks and snacks throughout the day. People who were at risk of poor nourishment were regularly weighed. This ensured people’s health and well-being was closely monitored and any changes were responded too.

Staff were patient and friendly and knew people well. Staff interacted well with people and engaged in conversation about things of interest to them.

People’s care and support needs were up to date and reviewed on a regular basis with the person or other appropriate people. Individualised care plans had been developed since the last inspection in November 2015. Staff provided people with person centred care and support.

People were aware of how to make a complaint if required and they told us they would not be worried about complaining if they needed to. People were confident that their complaints would be listened to and acted upon. Complaints reviewed had been followed in accordance with the registered providers policy and procedure.

Systems were in place to regularly check the quality of the service provided and to ensure improvements to the service were made. The registered manager and staff established good working relationships with family members and visiting professionals to the benefit of people who used the service.

We spoke with four people who were living in the home about their views and experiences of Parkside. All the people we spoke with told us they were very satisfied with the care and support provided to them. One person said, 'I originally came to stay here for respite care after I had been in hospital. I liked it so much I chose to come and live here.' Another person said 'This is a good place to be. We have just had our Christmas party and we had a great time.'

We reviewed three people's care records and found they contained the majority of information staff required to provide care in a way which met people's individual needs. At the time of our inspection people received care and support from sufficient numbers of staff. A complaints system was in place within the home.