Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Liaise

Park House

32 Ferme Park Road, Crouch End, London, N4 4ED

Goodpublished 12 January 2026, 7 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2024

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-managed care, with some record-keeping gaps already corrected.

The home supports up to six adults with a learning disability or autism. Six people were living there during the inspection. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and management checks.

The inspection was focused on Safe, Effective and Well-led. All three were rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, detailed risk assessments, suitable training and support from health professionals. People were supported to make choices, stay healthy and take part in decisions about their care.

The inspection followed an increase in reported incidents. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from this concern. They found some gaps in weight records, but the manager had taken action to correct them. The overall rating remains Good, and the home had acted on recommendations from the previous inspection.

What inspectors praised
  • Choice and independence

    People had personalised rooms, access to shared areas and support to make choices. Care plans focused on building independence and reducing restrictions.

    People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possiblefrom the report
  • Safe staffing and medicines

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment checks. Medicine records were complete and medicines were checked regularly.

    Medicine administration records were completed correctly with no gaps and reasons for giving 'as needed' medicines were documented.from the report
  • Personalised support

    Care plans covered physical and mental health, communication, cultural and spiritual needs, as well as people's goals and end of life wishes.

    Support plans included people's end of life care wishes.from the report
  • Open management

    Management was visible and approachable. Relatives and staff could raise concerns or suggestions, and the home used audits and meetings to make improvements.

    Management were visible in the service, approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, staff and other professionals had to say.from the report
  • Learning from incidents

    The home reviewed incidents, discussed lessons with staff and changed an activity arrangement to reduce distress for one person.

    The lesson learnt was the activity could have been broken down into two slots of smaller groups at different times.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Gaps in weight records

    minor

    A quality check found missing weight recordings for three people. The manager had taken action and corrected the issue, but you may want to check how this is now monitored.

    there were gaps in records. For example, there were gaps in weight recordings for 3 people.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you now check that everyone's weight records are completed on time?
  2. 02What changes were made after the increase in reported incidents, and how do you know those changes are working?
  3. 03How are restriction reduction plans reviewed, and how do you make sure calming medicines are used only as a last resort?
  4. 04How do you involve relatives in reviews of care plans, including cultural, spiritual and end of life wishes?
  5. 05How do you make sure people's food choices and cultural preferences continue to shape the weekly menus?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 2024 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Park House

4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.

  1. February 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Park House

  2. April 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. March 2017Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. October 2015Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. November 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. June 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. February 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. April 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. June 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 June 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Same provider

Other services run by Liaise (London) Limited

8 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Crossbrook Court

Cheshunt, EN8
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 3 years agocare home

St James House

Dartford, DA1
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 3 years agocare home

St James Mews

Dartford, DA1
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 3 years agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near London

3 Wray Court

London, N4 · 1.1 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Cheverton Lodge

London, N19 · 1.2 km
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home

Lennox House

London, N7 · 1.3 km
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 20 months agocare home

Lennox House

London, N7 · 1.3 km
Not yet rated
NursingDementia
Not yet ratedcare home