CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at St Peter's Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks, including through testing, protective equipment, cleaning and social distancing.
- Effective?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate whether care was effective.
- Caring?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate how caring the service was.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate how well the service responded to people's needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess or rate how well the service was led.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 21 January 2021. It was carried out as part of the CQC's response to coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control. They found health checks, temperature checks, lateral flow testing and protective equipment for visitors. The home also used separate entrances, cleaning schedules and social distancing arrangements.
The inspection was not rated. The report says inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, but it does not give ratings for the home's wider care.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors completed a health questionnaire, had their temperature checked and took a lateral flow test before entering. Protective equipment was available.
“Visitors were required to complete a health questionnaire before visiting the home. Temperature checks were completed on arrival and PPE (personal protective equipment) was available for all visitors.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Enhanced cleaning included regularly cleaning touch points such as handrails and door handles.
“The home was very clean and tidy. Enhanced cleaning schedules were in place. These included regular cleaning of touch areas such as handrails and door handles to reduce the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Staff infection controls
Staff had separate entrances and changing rooms for different areas. There was plenty of protective equipment and staff had received relevant training.
“There was a plentiful supply of PPE and a number of PPE stations around the home so staff could change their PPE prior to entering individual rooms.” from the report
Keeping families in touch
At the time of the inspection, only essential visits were allowed. Video calls were arranged for families who could not visit.
“Alternatives such as video calls were arranged for families who could not visit.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current arrangements for visits and visitor health checks?
- 02How does the home manage testing and protective equipment for visitors and staff?
- 03How will the home help us keep in contact if visits are restricted?
- 04How are shared areas, handrails and door handles cleaned?
- 05What were the home's ratings for care, staffing, activities and management at its most recent full inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus response; the report did not rate the other areas of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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, January 2020
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong community links.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 December 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, family members, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks and systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, risks, infection control and the environment were managed safely. People received support with their health, eating and drinking, communication and personal choices.
People and families described staff as kind and respectful. Care records were personalised and up to date. People had activities, links with the local community and support to avoid isolation. The manager and provider monitored the service and encouraged feedback.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The Responsive rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection, while the other ratings remained Good.
Safe staffing and risk management
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Risks and incidents were recorded, reviewed and used to make changes when needed.
“Risks were well managed. Staff understood potential risks and how to mitigate them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and families said staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff also supported independence and involved people in care planning.
“People and family members told us staff were kind, considerate and treated them with respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's needs, communication needs, preferences and choices. Records were regularly reviewed and up to date.
“Care records were regularly reviewed and up to date. Support plans were in place as required.” from the report
Activities and community links
The home offered person-centred activities and opportunities to maintain relationships. Inspectors found links with local groups, schools, churches and community services.
“Staff protected people from social isolation. Regular person-centred activities took place.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager and provider used audits, feedback and an improvement plan to monitor the service. The report describes a strong focus on ongoing improvement.
“There was a strong emphasis on continuous improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual care needs after they move in?
- 02How will you support my relative with medicines, nutrition, hydration and access to healthcare professionals?
- 03What activities and community links would be suitable for my relative's interests and communication needs?
- 04How will you support my relative's end of life wishes and record their choices?
- 05What has changed since the inspection in December 2019, especially after the previous issue with support plans for rehabilitation admissions?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection that looked at the care provided and the premises and assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 January 2020 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 St Peter's Court
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 January 2014.
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
31 live-in carers within about an hour of Redcar and Cleveland
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 £1,280 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.