CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beaufort House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection prevention arrangements, including PPE, testing, hygiene and managing outbreaks. They were only somewhat assured about social distancing and whether the infection control policy and audit were up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found mostly suitable infection controls, but social distancing and audit records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 26 January 2021. It was carried out because CQC had received concerns about infection prevention and control. The inspection looked only at these measures.
Inspectors were assured about visitors, shielding, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene and managing outbreaks. They found that chairs in the upstairs lounge were not spaced well enough for social distancing.
The home had an infection control policy and carried out regular checks. However, the infection control audit had not been updated for the COVID-19 pandemic. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
PPE and testing
Staff had training in PPE and infection prevention. People living at the home and staff were tested regularly for COVID-19.
“Staff had received training in the appropriate use of PPE and infection prevention control training.” from the report
Contact with relatives
The home arranged visits through a window and supported phone and video calls with loved ones.
“People were able to see loved ones through the window. They were able to communicate by phone at the same time.” from the report
Activities continued
Daily activities continued during the period covered by the inspection.
“Daily activities continued to take place which had been organised by the staff team.” from the report
Upstairs lounge spacing
needs fixingNot all chairs in the upstairs lounge were spaced sufficiently for social distancing. The provider said it would review this.
“Within the upstairs lounge area where people were sat, not all chairs were spaced to support social distancing.” from the report
Infection control audit
needs fixingThe home carried out regular checks, but its infection control audit had not been updated to reflect the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Although daily walk arounds were completed the audit had not been amended to reflect the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
- 01What changes were made to the upstairs lounge so chairs support social distancing?
- 02Has the infection control audit been updated for the COVID-19 pandemic?
- 03How often are infection control checks and daily walk-arounds now completed?
- 04How are visitors currently managed, and are window, phone and video visits still available?
- 05What were the ratings and findings at the last comprehensive inspection?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 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, August 2018
Beaufort House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and major improvements since the previous inspection, with two reporting oversights.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 and 12 June 2018. Inspectors spoke with people, a relative, staff and a health professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, staff recruitment and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training, personalised care records and regular activities.
The report says there had been significant improvements since the previous inspection in February 2017. Caring and Responsive had previously needed improvement, but were rated Good at this inspection.
There were some minor oversights. Two staff records did not have printed references, although the checks had been completed. Two notifications about authorised DoLS applications had not been sent to the CQC until the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff promoted dignity, privacy and independence and knew people well.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion and people were given support when they needed it.” from the report
Improved dignity at mealtimes
The home had corrected problems seen at the previous inspection. Eye drops were given privately and people received better support during meals.
“At this inspection we found a great improvement had been made.” from the report
Clear care information
Care plans and daily records gave staff useful information about people's needs, preferences and changes in wellbeing.
“People's daily notes contained comprehensive information regarding people's wellbeing.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People had regular activities inside and outside the home, including music, exercise, school links and trips.
“Weekly programmes of activities were arranged. These included activities in the service, such as armchair yoga, musical afternoons and singalong sessions.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and staff were not rushed. Staff received training, supervision and support.
“There were enough staff employed to help keep people safe and to meet their needs.” from the report
Recruitment records
minorTwo staff members' references had been checked but the printed evidence was not kept in their recruitment files. The manager showed inspectors that the checks had been done.
“This was because two staff members references had not been printed off the computer and stored with other recruitment records.” from the report
Late DoLS notifications
needs fixingTwo required notifications about authorised DoLS applications had not been submitted to the CQC before the inspection. They were submitted during the inspection.
“However, two notification forms had not been submitted to the CQC.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure all required CQC notifications, including DoLS notifications, are submitted on time?
- 02How do you check that every staff recruitment file contains printed references and all other required evidence?
- 03How many agency staff are currently used, and how do you maintain familiar staffing when there are vacancies?
- 04How are care plans and daily records updated when a person's health or needs change?
- 05What activities are available for someone with my relative's interests, mobility and communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; the report compares Caring and Responsive with the Requires Improvement ratings from February 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 August 2018 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 Beaufort House
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 December 2010.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Gloucestershire
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 £1,020 to £1,280 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.