CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beauchamp House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control. They found safe arrangements for visitors, admissions, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, isolation and managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about the home's COVID-19 infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 18 March 2021. It looked at how prepared the home was to prevent and control COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, followed social distancing and shielding rules, tested people and staff, and had arrangements for safe admissions and isolation.
The home supported phone and video calls with families and risk-assessed visits. It also had arrangements for visits when someone was nearing the end of their life.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report gives no overall quality rating and does not assess other areas of care in detail.
Infection checks
Visitors had their temperatures checked and recorded on entry. People living in the home, staff and visitors were tested regularly for COVID-19.
“All staff and visitors had their temperature measured, reviewed, and recorded on entry.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff followed personal protective equipment and social distancing guidance. The home also used pictures on name badges to help people recognise staff wearing protective equipment.
“Staff were adhering to personal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing guidance.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visits were risk assessed, with measures intended to reduce risk. The home had an adjoining flat with external access and arrangements for end-of-life visits.
“Inside and outside visits had been risk assessed and risk reduction measures were in place.” from the report
Isolation arrangements
The home had procedures for people with COVID-19 and for people arriving from hospital or the community. Inspectors said these arrangements reduced the risk of infection spreading.
“The provider had robust isolation arrangements in place for people who were infected with COVID-19” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 18 March 2021?
- 02How do you currently manage visits, including visits for people nearing the end of their life?
- 03What happens if a resident arrives from hospital or the community and needs to isolate?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested when there is a suspected or confirmed infection?
- 05How do you make sure staff are following the latest infection prevention and control guidance?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures; the home was inspected but not rated and other aspects of care were not assessed in detail. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 April 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, February 2020
Beauchamp House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few medicines recording errors being addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 January 2020. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting health professionals. They also checked care records, medicines records, recruitment information and audits.
Inspectors found that people were safe and received prompt support. Medicines were stored and given safely, staff were trained, and people had access to healthcare. Staff treated people with kindness, respected their choices and supported personalised activities and relationships.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had been rated Good overall at the previous inspection in 2017. The Safe rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good because staffing levels had increased.
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's preferences, and staff supported individual interests and wishes through creative activities.
“Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Support to avoid isolation
Staff used several approaches to help people stay connected, including visits from local children, postcards and activities with animals.
“Staff worked hard to support people's aims and wishes, and took a dedicated and innovative approach to ensure people did not feel socially isolated.” from the report
Safe staffing
Staffing levels had increased since the previous inspection, and people said they usually received support promptly.
“At this inspection, we found staffing levels had increased, and there were enough staff on shift to safely support people.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed warm, friendly interactions. People said staff listened to them and involved them in decisions about their care.
“We observed staff interact with people throughout the day, and saw staff were kind and caring in their approach to people, and gave them the time they required to communicate.” from the report
Quality checks
The home carried out regular audits and used incident information, complaints and feedback to make improvements.
“Regular quality checks and audits took place throughout the service.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingMedicines were administered safely, but audits found a few recording errors. The report says action had been taken to address them.
“Medicines audits shows a few recording errors, and what action has been taken to address this.” from the report
- 01What were the medicines recording errors found in the audits, and how have you checked that they have been fully corrected?
- 02What changes have been made through the improvement programme for mealtimes?
- 03Has the manager completed the CQC registration process?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient at all times, given the previous concerns about low staffing?
- 05How will you find out and support each new resident's personal wishes, interests and communication needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC questions; the Safe rating improved from Requires Improvement while the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 February 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 Beauchamp House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 April 2011.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.