CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beddell House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, staffing, recruitment, infection control and medicines were generally managed safely, but some medicine storage temperatures and records were not fully up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received effective support with eating and drinking, healthcare and consent. Food intake was not always fully recorded for some people who needed monitoring.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors saw staff providing compassionate support and spending time with people.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and based on people's choices and needs. Activities, communication support and complaints arrangements were in place.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider and manager used audits, feedback and staff meetings to monitor and improve the home. Inspectors found an open culture and effective work with outside professionals.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, with some medicines and food records needing attention.
This was the first inspection since the home was newly registered. It was unannounced and took place on 23 November and 01 December 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines records and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives described kind care. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, staffing, recruitment and infection control were generally managed safely.
Inspectors found a few record-keeping issues. Some medicine records had not been updated during a pharmacy change, medicine storage temperatures were not always recorded as required, and food intake was not always fully recorded for people who needed monitoring. The manager said action would be taken.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke highly of the staff's kindness and compassion. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity and spending time with them.
“During the inspection we saw staff delivering caring support and enjoying spending time with people at the service.” from the report
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and the home assessed and reviewed risks. Staffing levels were monitored and recruitment checks were completed.
“Risks to people were assessed and plans put in place to reduce the chances of them occurring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's choices and needs, and staff were kept informed about changes. People and relatives could be involved in care plan reviews.
“People received responsive support based on their choices and needs.” from the report
Activities and social contact
The home provided activities and acted on suggestions. People said activities helped them build relationships and avoid being alone.
“People spoke positively about the activities they took part in at the service, which helped them form meaningful and happy relationships.” from the report
Management and improvement
The provider used audits and feedback to monitor standards. Staff and external professionals were involved in improving people's care.
“The registered manager and provider carried out a range of audits to monitor and improve standards at the service.” from the report
Medicine storage checks
needs fixingMedicine storage temperatures were not always monitored in line with the home's policy. The manager said immediate action would be taken.
“However, temperatures were not always monitored in line with the provider's medicines policy to ensure they were stored safely.” from the report
Medicine records during pharmacy change
minorSome records had not been updated after the home began changing pharmacy. The manager's audits had identified this and action was planned.
“Some records had still not been updated to reflect this change, for example records to monitor creams.” from the report
Food intake records
needs fixingFor some people who needed monitoring, records did not fully show what they had eaten. The manager said action would be taken immediately.
“For some people, who needed monitoring, details of the food they had eaten had not been fully recorded.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to make sure medicine storage temperatures are checked and recorded in line with the medicines policy?
- 02Have all medicine records, including cream monitoring records, been updated since the pharmacy change?
- 03How do you now record food and drink for people who need their intake monitored?
- 04How are people's care plans reviewed when their needs or choices change?
- 05What activities are currently available, and how do you act on residents' suggestions?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 2022 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 Beddell House
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 October 2021.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.