CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beckfield House Residential Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Beckfield House Residential Home: Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and enough staff, but medicines and quality checks put people at risk.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over two days. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, toured the home and checked care files, medicines records and other documents.
People were generally treated with kindness and respect. There were enough staff, staff were trained, meals and healthcare support were provided, and people had activities and contact with visitors.
However, medicines were not always managed safely. Some care plans did not contain enough information about health risks, some equipment was worn and difficult to clean, and quality checks had not dealt with known problems quickly enough.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, responsive and well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while effective and caring were rated Good. The overall rating had fallen from Good at the previous inspection, published on 22 March 2017.
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were caring, friendly and respectful. Staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
“People were happy with the care provided as staff were caring and respectful.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels met people's needs and people received support in a timely way. Staffing was adjusted when people's needs changed.
“Staffing levels met people's needs and people were supported in a timely manner.” from the report
Staff training and support
New staff received induction and mandatory training. Staff also received regular training, supervision and appraisals.
“Staff had the skills and knowledge to support people safely.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in hobbies, community activities and social events. Visitors were welcome and people could meet them privately.
“People were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests.” from the report
Medicines were not always managed safely
seriousSome creams were not stored securely, medicine dates were unclear, and records and instructions were incomplete. Inspectors said this put people at risk of harm.
“The failure to ensure the proper and safe management of medicines placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
Quality checks did not deal with problems
seriousManagement systems identified some issues but did not always lead to timely action. This included medicines and missing detail in care plans.
“The failure to operate effective systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service placed people at risk of receiving a poor-quality service.” from the report
Care plans lacked important health information
needs fixingCare plans did not always explain risks linked to people's healthcare needs or the support staff should provide. Staff knew people's needs, but records did not always guide them clearly.
“Care plans did not always guide staff how to manage risks associated with people's healthcare needs.” from the report
Some equipment was worn
minorSome equipment used to support people was damaged and could not be cleaned properly. Replacement equipment had been requested.
“Items of equipment used to support people were seen to be damaged in places and therefore could not be properly cleaned.” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure all medicines, including creams and medicines used when needed, are stored, dated, recorded and supported by clear instructions?
- 02How are care plans checked now to make sure health risks and the support people need are recorded in enough detail?
- 03Have all damaged items of equipment been replaced, and how is their cleanliness and condition monitored?
- 04What changes have been made to the quality audit system since the inspection, and how do managers check that problems are fixed promptly?
- 05How will the home support people who need pictures or other adjustments to understand menus, activities and care information?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that assessed all five CQC questions; the report also records that Safe, Well-led and Responsive had Requires Improvement ratings, while Effective and Caring were rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 November 2019 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, March 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but activities and involvement in care plan reviews needed improvement.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 14 February 2017. They observed care, spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective and caring services, and for being well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable care plans, kind and respectful care, good food and strong leadership.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for being responsive. People said there were not enough activities or opportunities for stimulation and going out. People and relatives were also not always involved in reviewing care plans. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement at the February 2015 inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people warmly and patiently. They respected choices, privacy and dignity, and encouraged people to remain independent.
“There was a relaxed, homely atmosphere and throughout our inspection visit we saw that staff supported people in a caring, attentive way.” from the report
Safe care arrangements
Risks were assessed and reviewed as people's needs changed. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns, and medicines were generally managed safely.
“People's risk assessments were reviewed and updated to take account of changes in their needs.” from the report
Good food and healthcare support
People had choices of food and drink, including changes for allergies and other nutritional needs. Staff worked with local healthcare professionals when people needed specialist support.
“Kitchen staff had a good knowledge of people's preferences and used this to guide them in their menu planning and meal preparation.” from the report
Strong leadership and improvement
The manager was visible and supportive, and staff worked well as a team. The provider had introduced a more comprehensive system for checking quality.
“At this inspection we were pleased to find that the provider had responded positively to our report and had implemented a comprehensive approach to quality monitoring” from the report
Too little stimulation
needs fixingMany people said they were bored and wanted more activities, personal interests and opportunities to go out. The manager accepted that this needed improvement.
“I get bored. I join in when I can. But I would like to go outside more.” from the report
Families not always involved in reviews
needs fixingCare plans were well organised and regularly reviewed, but the report found no evidence that people and their families had been given the opportunity to take part.
“However, there was no evidence that people and their families had an opportunity to be involved in the process.” from the report
Some medicines and privacy issues
needs fixingSome liquid medicines were missing their opening dates, which could increase the risk of out-of-date medicine being given. Inspectors also found difficult-to-use toilet locks and unlocked interconnecting bedroom doors, although action was started on these issues.
“We found some liquid medicines that had not been marked with the date of opening, increasing the risk that people could be given out of date medicine.” from the report
- 01What activities and opportunities to go outside are available now, and how are they matched to each person's interests?
- 02How will my relative and our family be invited to take part in care plan reviews?
- 03How do you check that liquid medicines are dated when opened and are not kept beyond their safe use period?
- 04What changes have been made to the privacy of interconnecting bedroom doors and the toilet cubicle locks?
- 05How do you review staffing levels at night, including when someone needs to go to hospital?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Requires Improvement in February 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 2017 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 Beckfield House Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- November 2019Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Beckfield House Residential Home →
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Beckfield House Residential Home →
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 November 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.