CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beauchamp Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, effective care but gaps in risk assessments, care plans and quality checks.
The inspection took place on 30 March and 3 April 2023. One inspector visited the home, with the first day unannounced. They spoke with people living there, families, staff and the manager, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment and safety records.
People generally felt safe and said staff were kind, respectful and available. Inspectors found good support with health care, food, activities, choice and day-to-day care. Medicines, infection control and staffing were managed safely.
However, risk assessments did not cover some important risks, including moving and handling, medicines and skin integrity. Care plans did not include all relevant information, such as communication needs and people's wishes about end-of-life care. Quality checks had not found these problems.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Effective and Caring were rated Good. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. This was the first inspection under the provider's new legal entity. The service was previously rated Good under the former provider in 2018.
Kind and respectful staff
People and families described staff as kind, friendly and respectful. Staff supported people's choices, privacy and independence.
“Staff were kind and caring and treated people with respect.” from the report
Staffing and continuity
People said staff were available when needed. The home had a stable team and did not need agency staff.
“There were enough staff on each shift to keep people safe and meet their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Inspectors found medicines were managed safely, with trained staff and accurate records. The home was also clean and had suitable infection control arrangements.
“Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Good support with health and food
People were helped to access health services and maintain their health. They enjoyed the food and could influence the menu or choose alternatives.
“People enjoyed the food at the home and had input into the development of the menu.” from the report
Care plans lacked important details
needs fixingCare plans did not fully describe people's communication needs or their wishes for end-of-life care. The manager sent evidence after the inspection that these plans had been updated.
“People's care plans did not encompass all relevant areas of their lives.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
needs fixingThe home carried out audits and care plan reviews, but these checks had not identified the gaps found by inspectors.
“The systems and processes in place to monitor quality and safety had not been effective.” from the report
No registered manager at the visit
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in place when inspectors visited. A new manager was due to start on 11 April 2023, after the inspection.
“There was not a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection.” from the report
- 01Have all risks, including moving and handling, medicines and skin integrity, now been assessed for my relative?
- 02What changes have been made to care plans for communication needs and end-of-life wishes?
- 03How do you now check that care plan reviews and audits identify problems promptly?
- 04Who is currently managing the home, and has the new manager started and registered with the CQC?
- 05What plans are in place to restart trips and outings?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the previous Good rating was under the former provider and the new legal entity was inspected for the first time. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 May 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 Beauchamp Court
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- May 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 February 2022.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.