You are here

Archived: Mark A Peake - 21 Totterdown Street Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 16 June 2015

This inspection took place on 7 May 2015 and was unannounced. The service met the requirements of the regulations during the previous inspection which took place on 7 May 2013.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Mark A Peake - 21 Totterdown Street is a small care home for two men with mild learning disabilities. It is located in Tooting, South-West London. It is close to local amenities and has good transport links. It is one of three homes owned by Mark A Peake.

The home was safe for people to live in. Regular health and safety checks were carried out for the service. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Each person had their own bedroom, bathroom and lounge which they used to entertain family and friends. They shared a kitchen.

People told us that they liked living at the home and that they felt safe. They told us that staff treated them well and they were able to lead independent lives. They were able to pursue their own interests and were not restricted from leaving the home. They said that staff supported them if needed, for example if they needed assistance with cooking.

People’s needs in terms of their medicines and their diet were met by the service. People told us they were able to see healthcare professionals such as their GP or consultant psychiatrist if they needed.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Robust pre-employment checks were carried out on staff before they started working at the service. Ongoing training in areas that were relevant to the needs of people was provided, for example autism awareness and dealing with behaviour that challenged. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the areas they had received training in, for example the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and specific ways that they would deal with incidents of behaviour that challenged. Staff received regular supervision and told us they felt well supported and valued.

Care plans and other records such as medicines profiles and risk assessments were reviewed on a regular basis which helped to ensure up to date information was always available about people and their support needs.

There was continuity in the home with respect to how long people had been living there, but also in respect of staff that had worked there for a long time. The registered manager had been managing the service since it had opened and these factors contributed to the fact that the service was well run in all aspects, and both people using the service and staff were happy living and working there.

Inspection areas



Updated 16 June 2015

The service was safe.

People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff knew what steps to take if they suspected abuse and had attended safeguarding training.

There were enough staff to meet the needs of people.

Medicines were stored and managed appropriately and medicines

administration records (MAR) were all completed correctly.

Both individual risk assessments for people and environmental risks were carried out which helped to ensure people were kept safe.



Updated 16 June 2015

The service was effective.

People were able to lead independent lives and were not restricted from leaving the home. Staff displayed a good understanding of the Mental capacity Act 2005.

Staff received regular training and supervision.

People’s healthcare needs were met through regular appointments with relevant professionals.

People told us they cooked for themselves with staff support. The kitchen was well stocked with food which they were able to access when they wanted.



Updated 16 June 2015

The service was caring.

There was a friendly, relaxed atmosphere at the home. People were able to meet family and friends and maintain relationships.

Their privacy and dignity was respected by staff.



Updated 16 June 2015

The service was responsive.

Care plans were reviewed regularly. People were able to pursue activities of their choosing.

The provider had an appropriate system in place for managing complaints.

People told us if they were not happy they would speak to staff or the manager.



Updated 16 June 2015

The service was well led.

Staff felt valued and they told us there was an open culture at the service.

The registered manager was hands on and familiar with all aspects of the service. Quality monitoring for the service was carried out.