CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beech House - Binfield
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, PPE, testing, social distancing, admissions and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Beech House - Binfield was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, with some further development signposted.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 26 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing, admissions and possible outbreaks. They also found the building clean and free from clutter.
The home supported contact with families through telephone and video calls, garden visits and screened visits. Staff also arranged activities such as games, themed crafts and seated dance classes.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating.
Family contact
The home supported telephone and video calls and arranged visits in ways designed to reduce infection risks. Families could also create personal newsletters with photographs.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and video call contact with their family and friends.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for screening visitors, using PPE, testing people and staff, and managing possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Clean environment
The building was clean and uncluttered. Furniture had been rearranged to support social distancing where possible.
“The building was clean and free from clutter, with furniture rearranged to support social distancing where possible” from the report
Activities
Staff provided activities to support people's stimulation, health and wellbeing, including games, themed crafts and seated dance.
“Staff ensured people had sufficient stimulation to support their health and wellbeing.” from the report
Further development
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not explain what specific changes were needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made since the inspection to the infection prevention and control approach?
- 02How are visits currently arranged, and how are visitors screened and provided with PPE?
- 03What is the home's current process for isolating someone with COVID-19 or managing an outbreak?
- 04How often are people living in the home and staff tested now?
- 05What resources was the home signposted to, and what action was taken as a result?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full service rating or assess the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some staffing pressures and a recommendation to update training.
Inspectors visited without notice on 6 and 7 September 2017. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and community professionals. They observed care, meals and activities, and checked care plans, medicines, staff files and safety records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and risks, received their medicines safely, and had enough food, drink and health care.
Care was described as kind and respectful. People's choices, privacy, independence, activities and relationships were supported. The home remained Good, as at the previous inspection, and met the fundamental standards of quality and safety.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff respond promptly and knew people well. Privacy, dignity and confidentiality were protected.
“All interactions between staff and people living at the service were respectful and friendly.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes and preferred ways of receiving support. Staff encouraged people to remain independent where possible.
“People received support that was individualised to their personal preferences and needs.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could choose from varied activities, gardening and regular outings. Activities reflected individual interests and links with different communities.
“Three or four outings were arranged each month and we saw many photographs around the service of people enjoying their time in the community.” from the report
Learning from falls
The manager used sensors, training, exercise and activity changes to reduce falls. Inspectors reported an 80% reduction in accidents over three years.
“The figures demonstrated that this excellent care practice and innovative way of working had resulted in a reduction in accidents over three years by 80%.” from the report
Staffing during absences
needs fixingStaff said numbers had sometimes fallen below the planned level because of annual leave or sickness. On one weekend, care staff were also covering a kitchen vacancy, leaving less time for social activities.
“staff numbers had fallen to four care workers during the two day shifts on both days.” from the report
Training updates
minorAlthough mandatory training was up to date, the provider's timetable did not match current best practice. Fire safety and first aid were updated every three years rather than annually.
“We recommend that the provider bring the staff training provision in line with the current best practice guidance on ongoing training for social care staff.” from the report
- 01How do you cover care shifts when staff are off sick or on annual leave?
- 02Has the kitchen assistant vacancy been filled, so care staff are not taken away from care duties?
- 03Have fire safety and first aid training updates been changed to an annual schedule?
- 04How do you make sure people still receive social activities at weekends?
- 05What has changed since this September 2017 inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 October 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 Beech House - Binfield
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 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
81 live-in carers within about an hour of Bracknell Forest
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 £1,300 a week. 74 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.