CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beech Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control arrangements, including testing, PPE, safe admissions, isolation and visiting. They were only somewhat assured about premises layout and hygiene because staff clothing guidance was not in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Beech Court Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found mostly good infection control, with a gap in staff clothing guidance.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 28 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak, staffing pressures and whether people were kept safe.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visitors, testing, PPE, safe admissions, cleaning and isolation. There were enough staff, and agency staff were not needed. The home was visibly clean and had space for safer visits, including a summer house.
The home was in outbreak status and closed to non-essential visitors at the time, although all residents had tested negative and it was expected to reopen soon. Inspectors were somewhat assured about the layout and hygiene arrangements because there was no clear process telling staff what clothes to wear when coming to or leaving work.
This inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated, and the other four questions were not assessed in this targeted inspection.
Infection control
The home had regular testing, sufficient PPE and procedures for managing an outbreak and safely admitting new residents.
“A robust testing regime was in place. All staff and people living at the home were tested regularly and in accordance with government guidance.” from the report
Safe visiting
There was indoor and outdoor space for visits, with measures to reduce infection risk and support people's wellbeing.
“There was sufficient space indoors and outdoors for safe visitation to take place.” from the report
Staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely, including during sickness, holidays and COVID-19 isolation.
“There were enough staff to support people safely and to cover any staff holidays, sickness and COVID-19 isolation.” from the report
Staff clothing guidance
needs fixingThere was no process explaining what clothes staff should wear when arriving for work or leaving. Inspectors said this increased the risk of spreading COVID-19, and the provider said it would address the issue.
“We did note there was no process in place informing staff what clothes they should wear when arriving to and leaving from work.” from the report
- 01What process is now in place to tell staff what clothes to wear when arriving at and leaving work?
- 02What are the current visiting arrangements now that the outbreak has ended?
- 03How do you support people living with dementia when they need to isolate?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested, and what happens when someone tests positive?
- 05How do you make sure there are enough staff during sickness, holidays and COVID-19 isolation?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it did not assess Effective, Caring, Responsive or Well-led, and Safe was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Beech Court Care Home was rated Good overall, but inspectors found that its leadership and quality checks still Required Improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 18 October 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. People were protected from abuse, there were enough staff, care was kind and person-centred, and people's health, nutrition, activities and complaints were generally well supported.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Some quality checks had not identified missing care guidance, incomplete medicine information, gaps in falls analysis and some cleanliness issues. The home sent information after the inspection showing that it had taken action.
The home had improved since the previous inspection and was no longer in breach of the two regulations previously identified. However, inspectors said further improvement was still needed in quality monitoring.
Enough staff
Inspectors saw enough staff available throughout the day. Staff responded promptly to requests for help and people were not left unattended for long periods.
“On the day of the inspection we saw staff were meeting the needs of people in their care.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's preferences and supported their choices, privacy, dignity and independence. Inspectors saw warm and cheerful interactions.
“The above information showed the staff treated people with kindness and respect and worked to ensure their choices in relation to their care were met.” from the report
Individual care
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, including nutrition, communication and mobility. Staff understood and followed this guidance in most cases.
“People were provided with individualised person-centred care from staff who knew their needs.” from the report
Improved nutrition
The home had made significant improvements since the previous inspection. People received appropriate support with eating and drinking, and staff understood specialist diets and nutritional risks.
“During our inspection we saw how staff provided appropriate support for people who required help when eating and drinking.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People could choose from activities such as exercise, relaxation, games, singing and a community crafts club. Staff also supported individual interests.
“People were supported to take part in a range of social activities at the service.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
needs fixingThe home's audits had not identified some important issues. These included missing pressure care guidance, limited analysis of falls and cleanliness concerns.
“However there were still further improvements in the quality monitoring processes to be made.” from the report
Medicine records
minorProtocols were missing for one or two recently prescribed medicines used when needed. One handwritten prescription was not signed and witnessed correctly, although the manager took action afterwards.
“However, one or two medicines that had recently been prescribed for use in this way had not had protocols completed.” from the report
Infection control
needs fixingHand-washing arrangements had improved, but inspectors and an external organisation still found that the measures did not fully reduce the risk of cross infection. Further action was reported after the inspection.
“However, at this inspection, while we saw the measures were in place, there was still a risk of cross infection that could be further mitigated.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure every care plan clearly records repositioning needs and specialist equipment settings?
- 02How are medicine protocols checked when a new medicine is prescribed for use when needed?
- 03What further infection control measures were put in place after the inspection, particularly for hand washing?
- 04How are falls now analysed for patterns, and what action is taken when a pattern is found?
- 05How does the home check that its quality audits identify cleanliness and care-record problems?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 December 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 Beech Court Care Home
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 October 2016.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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 £1,260 a week. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.