CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Petersfield Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People had care plans and risk assessments, received medicines safely and were protected from abuse. Some care records and risk assessments needed minor updates, which were completed during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and worked with health professionals to support people's health. Inspectors noted delays in specialist services and said a written agreement about some delegated health tasks was needed; this was completed during the inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, respectful and knew people's needs, likes and dislikes well. People and those important to them were involved in decisions about care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences, life histories and communication needs. People were supported to choose activities, maintain relationships and access the local community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager led a positive, person-centred culture and staff felt supported. Audits and other checks were used to monitor quality, and issues identified during the inspection were acted on promptly.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Petersfield Care Home rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some records and specialist support issues addressed or noted.
The home provides personal care for up to five people with learning disabilities and autistic people. Four people lived there during the inspection. The inspection was unannounced and took place on 06 and 12 December 2022.
The inspector spoke with all four people, a relative, two health and social care professionals and four staff members. They reviewed care records, staff recruitment and support files, medicines records and other management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and respect, involved in decisions, and supported to be independent and take part in activities they chose.
Some minor records needed updating and there had been delays in specialist support. The records and several other issues were updated or addressed during the inspection. This was the first inspection of the newly registered service.
Personalised choices
People were involved in everyday decisions, including when they got up, what they ate and how they spent their time.
“People's care records demonstrated they were given a choice about how they were supported with their care including what time they got up, and how they spent their time and what they wanted to eat.” from the report
Kind and knowledgeable staff
Staff knew people well and responded to their requests in a respectful way.
“People were comfortable and relaxed around staff members and were comfortable to make requests which were responded to.” from the report
Safe medicines support
People received their medicines safely and on time. Staff had medicines training and their competence had been checked.
“People received their medicines on time and in a safe way. Records were maintained to document the administration of medications.” from the report
Independence and community life
People were supported to pursue interests, take part in chosen activities and use local facilities.
“People were supported to access local facilities and were supported by staff to pursue their interests.” from the report
Delays in specialist support
needs fixingThe manager said specialist services had been harder to access, causing delays in reassessments and specialist support for some people.
“The registered manager told us specialist services had been more difficult to access, and there had been delays with people receiving reassessments and specialist support as a result of this.” from the report
Records needed updating
minorSome care records and risk assessments did not fully reflect changing needs at first. They were updated during the inspection.
“Some minor updating of care records and risk assessments were taking place, to reflect changing needs, these were completed during our inspection.” from the report
Window restrictor guidance
minorInspectors advised the manager that guidance about window restrictors had changed. The manager said they would review the risk assessment and update their knowledge.
“We advised the registered manager there had been a change in guidance about the type of restrictors on windows in care homes.” from the report
- 01What is the current position on recruiting to the vacant staff posts?
- 02How do you make sure care plans and risk assessments are updated promptly when someone's needs change?
- 03Which specialist reassessments or support have been delayed, and what is being done to obtain them?
- 04What written agreements are now in place for health tasks delegated by district nurses?
- 05What review has been completed following the change in guidance about first-floor window restrictors?
This was an unannounced inspection of the newly registered service covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous Good rating was under a different legal entity. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 January 2023 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 Petersfield Care Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 May 2021.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.