Park View Court

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this service since they registered on 27 March 2023. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. People care plans were person focused and provided information on how the person wanted their support provided. People’s communication needs were identified, and information was provided in an appropriate format.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were happy with the care provided, the staff provided support which met their needs and reflected their wishes. People confirmed they had been involved in the development and review of their care plans.

Staff confirmed they regularly reviewed people’s care plans and risk assessments to ensure they had up to date information on the person’s care and support needs in case there had been any changes.

Most people explained that they did not always have the same staff providing their care for each, but they knew all the staff members who visited. One person said, “Usually they are different, it does not worry me. I know all their names and all about them.” Another person stated they were not happy with not having

Staff had a clear understanding of people’s care and support needs.

We did not receive feedback from partners regarding this aspect of the service.

People’s care plans indicated if they were receiving support with their health and wellbeing from external healthcare or other professional. The provider had system for staff to share information about the care provided to people using the service though handover meetings.

People explained that the information they received from the provider of their care was in an appropriate format to meet their communication support needs.

Staff told us they explained to people about the care they were providing, and there were detailed care plans in place.

People’s communication needs and preferences were identified during the initial needs assessment and were identified in the care plan. Staff were allocated to support people with the same preferred language whenever possible. Information could be provided in a range of formats including audio book, braille, large print and translated into the person’s preferred language.

People confirmed that senior staff usually contacted them to discuss issues by visiting them in their flat or by the telephone. People told us they understood how to raise a concern relating to their care. Where a person had previously raised a concern with the provider, they told us it was responded to in a timely manner and the issue was resolved their satisfaction.

The registered manager explained they had an open-door policy for people and staff to raise any concerns. People were also given the registered manager’s contact details. The registered manager also explained that they met with people during group and individual meetings in addition to a weekly coffee morning.

The provider undertook quarterly surveys with people receiving support which asks their feedback on their care and general comments on the service. This feedback was reviewed and, if required, actions were identified. There was a robust complaints process and concerns were responded in line with the provider’s policy.

People explained that staff supported them to access activities both inside and outside of the building which included going to activities in the communal lounge, visiting the local library and day trips.

We did not receive feedback from care workers regarding this aspect of the service.

The provider had an out of hours service for people to contact in case of an emergency.

People we spoke with confirmed they received support with their cultural and religious needs if they required this. A person explained they received a DVD of the church service. A relative told us their family member received visits from members of their faith community.

Staff confirmed they had completed training to meet the specific care needs of people they were providing support for which included stoma support, brain injury, dysphagia and chronic lung conditions.

People’s care plans provided staff with information on the person’s personal history and cultural and religious preferences. Staff completed training on equality and diversity as well as sexual health and wellbeing.

The provider was not supporting anyone using the service with end-of-life care at the time of our assessment.

Staff had access to information about people wishes in relation to their wishes for their care if their health deteriorated.

People’s care plans identified if the person had any current palliative care needs. There was also guidance in relation to if the person had a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) in place.