CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Peacehaven
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitor checks, testing, PPE, cleaning and safe admission arrangements. They identified some points about staff fleece jackets and the infection-control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection-control arrangements, with some PPE and policy points to address.
This was a targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. Inspectors gave the home 24 hours' notice. They looked mainly at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were checked, testing was in place, PPE was available and used properly, and cleaning schedules were followed. The home was closed to new admissions at the time, and it had arrangements for safe admissions.
Inspectors noted some matters to improve. These included considering staff wearing fleece jackets, adding more detail to cleaning schedules, and updating the infection-control policy so it fully matched practice.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other four questions.
PPE and infection control
Staff were observed using PPE appropriately, and there was enough PPE available for staff and visitors.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors had to show a COVID pass and a recent negative test. These checks were recorded when visitors entered.
“All visitors must present a COVID pass and a confirmation of a negative test undertaken within 24 hrs on entry to the building.” from the report
Testing and vaccination checks
Testing was in place for staff and people living in the home. The home also recorded staff vaccination and booster information.
“Checks were in place and logs of staff vaccination status including boosters were recorded and monitored.” from the report
Support during restrictions
The home used video calls, window visits and staff support to help people keep in contact and maintain their wellbeing.
“The service had made the decision that until none of the people living in the service were testing negative for coronavirus no new admissions would be undertaken.” from the report
Staff fleece jackets
minorInspectors said the home needed to consider whether staff wearing fleece jackets was appropriate in relation to infection control.
“However, consideration needed to be in place regarding the wearing of fleece jackets for staff.” from the report
Policy did not fully match practice
needs fixingThe infection-control policy was being updated, but it did not yet fully reflect what the home was doing.
“The manager intended to update the policy to fully reflect the practice in place in the service.” from the report
Cleaning schedule details
minorThe provider added further details to the cleaning schedules during the inspection.
“The provider added additional details to the schedules during the inspection.” from the report
- 01What decision was made about staff wearing fleece jackets, and what is the current infection-control policy?
- 02Has the infection-control policy now been updated to fully reflect the home's practice?
- 03What additional details were added to the cleaning schedules, and how are they now checked?
- 04How are visitors currently required to show vaccination and testing information?
- 05What arrangements are currently in place for new admissions and for people to keep in contact with relatives?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures during COVID-19; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 2022 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.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding personalised activities and end-of-life support, and Good ratings in the other areas.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 23 July 2019. They spoke with nine people living in the home, four visitors and five staff. They also reviewed care records, medicine records, training information, staffing records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, received suitable care and food, were treated kindly, and benefited from stable staffing and effective management.
Responsive care was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found activities were based on people's wishes, independence was encouraged, communication needs were supported, and end-of-life care was highly personalised. The overall rating remained Good, while Responsive improved from Good at the previous inspection.
Personalised activities
Activities were organised around people's wishes and included trips, meals out, shopping and community activities. Dedicated staff and volunteers helped more people take part.
“Activities took place each day; two dedicated staff worked over seven days, including evenings, when particular activities took place.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found a caring and friendly atmosphere. Staff knew people well and supported their privacy, dignity, independence and choices.
“There was a very caring and friendly atmosphere in the home between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Support for independence
The home used lifeline pendants so people could call for help when away from a call bell. Inspectors found this helped people move around with fewer restrictions.
“The service was highly effective at promoting people's independence.” from the report
End-of-life care
End-of-life care plans recorded people's wishes, including religious wishes. Relatives spoke very highly of the care, and the home allowed relatives to stay overnight.
“The home provided facilities to enable relatives to stay overnight with their family member.” from the report
Communication support
Care records recorded people's preferred ways of communicating. Staff used communication aids such as mood boards, emotion cards and yes and no cards.
“Staff had created mood boards, emotion cards, yes and no cards, and printed sentences for pointing to help people who had difficulty communication verbally.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are activities currently organised around each resident's wishes and interests?
- 02Are lifeline pendants still offered, and how quickly do staff respond when someone uses one?
- 03How do you record and support each resident's preferred method of communication?
- 04How are residents and relatives involved in changing menus and planning activities?
- 05How would you support our relative and the family with end-of-life wishes, including overnight stays?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 August 2019 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.
Every inspection of Peacehaven
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Sefton
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,270 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.