Working at St Jude's House
14 Canadian Avenue, London, SE6 3AS
Operated by Elizabeth Peters Care Homes Limited
12 bedsResidential homes
Workplace Score
3.9/10
AI analysis of latest data
Our AI workplace review
PlainSight AI Review
Last updated: 9 February 2026
Score: 3.9/10
Key Finding
"Staff feel supported with good training, but unsafe night staffing with only one carer, weak recruitment checks and no activities hold it back."
Safety & Risk
2/10
✕
Evacuation records... showed 2 or more staff had not been able to evacuate all the people... Despite this the provider had 1 member of staff on duty during the night. This increased the risk of people being able to be evacuated from the service safely by 1 member of staff.
Staff Culture
6/10
✓
Staff told us they felt supported by their colleagues, the registered manager and senior management gave them the confidence to support people well. One staff member told us, “Senior staff offers guidance, appreciation, opportunities and feedback. It helps improve my morale, and sense of being valued.”
Staffing Levels
2/10
✕
We found there was not enough staff on duty during the night to reduce the risk of harm to people in the case of an emergency. Pre-employment checks were not robust, we found not all staff had provided full employment histories.
Training & Dev
6/10
✓
Staff had access to training and supervision and told us they were happy with the support they received in relation to this. Staff had attended mandatory safeguarding training sessions annually, and refresher courses were provided.
Management
4/10
!
Governance, management and sustainability Score:2 - audits in place, however, these did not identify the issues we found with care plans, risk assessments or effective information gathering for staff recruitment prior to the assessment.
Programmes
2/10
✕
No activities, engagement programmes, creative approaches, or distinctive features mentioned beyond routine personal care and meal preparation.
Points to consider
Only one carer on duty at night, which is unsafe in emergencies and breaks staffing rules.
there was only 1 member of staff on duty in the home throughout the night which posed a risk. The provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating to safe staffing.
Recruitment checks were incomplete with missing work histories and right to work documents for some staff.
Pre-employment checks were not robust, we found not all staff had provided full employment histories. We found some right to work in the UK checks were not complete.
No activities programme or coordinator, so the role is mostly routine personal care.
No activities, engagement, or creative approaches mentioned at all in the report.
AI Generated
CQC Inspection Overview
CQC Inspection
Last inspected: April 2025
Good
Safe
!
Requires improvement
Effective
✓
Good
Caring
✓
Good
Responsive
✓
Good
Management Quality
Well-led: Good
Staff Reviews
Direct feedback from current and former employees
No one has reviewed yet. Be the first.
Scan the QR code or tap the button to chat with us on WhatsApp. Your identity stays completely anonymous.
Chat on WhatsAppSources
- Care Quality Commission (CQC) Inspection Data
- PlainSight staff reviews