CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Peregrine House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, admissions, social distancing and hygiene. The inspection only looked at infection control measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Peregrine House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and support for families during the pandemic.
Inspectors visited the home on 3 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It focused on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors said they were assured that visitors, admissions, testing, PPE, social distancing and hygiene arrangements were being managed safely. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
Staff supported residents' social and emotional wellbeing. Families were kept informed through telephone calls, garden visits and video calls. Staff had infection control training, including checks on using PPE safely.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for the five areas of care.
Infection control training
All staff had training in infection prevention and control. The registered manager also carried out competency checks on using PPE safely.
“All staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control.” from the report
Family communication
The home kept relatives informed about government guidance and residents' health through calls, garden visits and video calls.
“Relatives were kept informed about people's health using telephone calls, garden and video calls.” from the report
Checks and communication
The home had quality checks and a communication system to give staff consistent updates about infection control.
“There was a communication system in place to ensure staff received consistent updates in relation to infection control policy and practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control and PPE procedures are in place now?
- 02How are visitors currently screened and supported to visit safely?
- 03How does the home keep families informed about residents' health and government guidance?
- 04How often are staff's infection control skills and PPE use checked?
- 05When was the home's infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not give a full assessment of the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 2021 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, December 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home was not always well-led.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and quality monitoring records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. People told inspectors they felt safe, staff understood their needs, medicines were managed safely, and people were treated with dignity and respect.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had improved since the previous inspection, but its checks did not always cover every area clearly or record what action had been taken. The home was no longer in breach of regulations at this inspection.
Safe medicines support
People received medicines on time, and staff had medicines training with their competence checked.
“People received their medicines on time; staff stored, administered and recorded their medicines appropriately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found positive relationships between people and staff. Staff supported dignity, privacy and independence.
“People were treated with compassion, kindness and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's routines, interests and preferences. Care plans included person-centred information and were reviewed when needs changed.
“Care plans contained detailed information about people's interests and personal preferences.” from the report
End of life planning
People's wishes about end of life care were discussed and recorded. Relatives could stay overnight during a person's final days.
“People's end of life wishes had been discussed with them and recorded.” from the report
Quality checks were incomplete
needs fixingThe home's audits did not always check every relevant area or clearly record what had been done to improve things. Feedback from people and relatives also did not always have recorded follow-up.
“These needed further development and adaptation to ensure they included checks on all areas of the service and clearly recorded action taken as a result.” from the report
Some risk records lacked detail
needs fixingRisks were recorded, but the level of risk was not always identified. The registered manager took action after this was discussed.
“Risks to people were recorded, but the level of risk had not always been identified.” from the report
Behaviour support plans needed more guidance
needs fixingSome plans did not clearly tell staff what to do when a person's anxiety changed. The registered manager acted to address this.
“People's complex behaviour care plans did not always provide staff with sufficient information.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure quality audits cover every area of the home and record the action taken?
- 02How are risks recorded, including the level of risk and any changes over time?
- 03How do behaviour support plans tell staff what to do when a person's anxiety changes?
- 04How do you record and follow up actions resulting from residents' and relatives' feedback?
- 05How do you check that accidents and incidents have been reviewed and signed off by management?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that considered all five CQC questions, with the inspection prompted by the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 December 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 Peregrine House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has slipped, from Outstanding to Good.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2018Requires improvementdown from OutstandingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016OutstandingSafe: OutstandingEffective: OutstandingCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 November 2010.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.