Bingley Park Care Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 1 April 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Assessment dates were 9 March 2026 to 20 March 2026, with site visit dates on 9 and 10 March 2026. Bingley Park Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 72 adults, some of whom may be living with dementia or have a sensory impairment or a physical disability. At the time of the assessment, the service was supporting 37 people. The service is currently unrated, first registered October 2024. This is a fully comprehensive assessment, covering all quality statements.

The service promotes a positive learning culture and has robust systems and processes in place regarding safeguarding and safe staffing. The service controls and maintains the risks in relation to the environment, and infection, prevention control (IPC). Medicines were safely managed within the service, with appropriate policies and procedures in place. Staff had completed appropriate training to support with safe care, such as safeguarding training.

There are robust systems in place for assessment of people’s needs and monitoring and improving outcomes, such as a regular audits completed by leaders within the service. People were supported to live healthier lives by regularly exercising or attending community activities. People were provided with consent documentation and were asked by staff for consent before support was provided, with an embedded understanding of appropriate legislation such as The Mental Capacity Act (2005), (MCA, 2005). However, monitoring of people’s outcomes was not always effective. There was at times incorrect information in care documentation, and people or their relatives, were not clear on how often care should be reviewed.

We observed staff demonstrated kindness, compassion and dignity towards people. People were treated as individuals, having care plans tailored to their specific needs, likes and preferences. Staff knew people well and were responsive to people’s immediate needs to reduce distress. There were mixed responses from staff regarding workforce wellbeing. The service has advised us how they plan to make improvements in this area.

People’s care plan documentation was person centred, and bedrooms were well personalised. People were provided with information, which was important to their care, as well as information about how to raise concerns, such as safeguarding. People were involved in care planning and reviews and had equal access to services, such as community activities, including those who are at risk of inequality in line with appropriately legislation such as the Equality Act (2010), (EA, 2010). There was documentation in place which supported discussions for planning for the future, including end of life planning.

The service had a clear, shared vision which was embedded throughout by leaders. There were robust systems and processes in place which reflected capable and inclusive leadership, such as regular audits and oversight, good governance, supervision and team meetings. However, there were some instances where incorrect information was not identified by leaders in the service. People and staff, we spoke with, felt able to speak up to leaders about any concerns they had, and felt confident concerns would be dealt with appropriately. However, recent staff surveys reflected staff felt unable to approach leaders. The service worked well with other agencies through partnership working such as health and local authority services. There were mechanisms to support learning, improvement and innovation within the service, such as staff surveys and service improvement plans. Oversight was also in place from the services provider Tanglewood Ltd, to support with driving improvements.