CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Beech Tree Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found systems to protect people from abuse and manage risks. Medicines, infection control, equipment and accident reporting were managed appropriately, although some visitors raised concerns about staffing levels in certain areas.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care was based on detailed assessments and regular reviews. Staff had relevant training and competency checks, and people were supported with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people well, involved them in decisions and promoted their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's changing needs, communication needs and preferences. People could take part in a range of activities, complaints were managed professionally, and end of life care was planned.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager had quality checks, audits and improvement plans in place. However, some changes to the care record system had not been understood by all staff, leading to inaccurate or incomplete records in some people's rooms.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some care records were inaccurate or incomplete.
The CQC made an unannounced planned inspection visit on 6 and 7 February 2020. An inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with eight people, nine relatives, the manager and six staff. They observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm, received medicines as prescribed, and had detailed care plans. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and people were supported with activities, healthcare and personal choices.
There were two issues to keep under review. Some visitors said there were not always enough staff in some areas, and the manager agreed to examine staff deployment. Inspectors also found some inaccurate or incomplete records in people's rooms, which were removed immediately when this was raised.
This was the first inspection of the newly registered service. The previous rating was Good, published on 4 April 2018, and the provider had changed since then.
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found systems to protect people from abuse and manage risks. Medicines were given as prescribed, stored securely and reviewed with healthcare professionals.
“People had their medicines in line with their prescriptions and preferences.” from the report
Individual care planning
Care plans covered people's physical, mental and social needs and were reviewed when circumstances changed. Staff used professional guidance and specialist advice where needed.
“People's care and support were based on detailed, individual assessments and care plans.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as caring. Inspectors saw positive relationships and found that privacy, dignity and independence were promoted.
“There were caring relationships between people and staff. Staff knew people, their interests, life histories, and families.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities inside the home and in the community. The home also provided individual activities for people who stayed in their rooms.
“The service supported people to take part in a variety of activities both inside the home and in the community.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager used audits, meetings, walk-rounds and an improvement plan to monitor the service and address issues.
“The manager had an effective quality system in place.” from the report
Staff deployment
needs fixingSome visitors said there were not always enough staff in some areas of the home. The manager agreed to look at how staff were deployed.
“We discussed with the manager feedback from some visitors that there were not always enough staff in some areas of the home.” from the report
Inaccurate room records
seriousChanges to the care record system had not been understood by all staff. Some records in people's rooms were inaccurate or incomplete, creating a risk of inappropriate care, although the manager removed them immediately.
“There were some inaccurate and incomplete records in people's rooms which meant these people were at risk of inappropriate care.” from the report
- 01How have you changed staff deployment since visitors said there were not always enough staff in some areas?
- 02What checks now make sure records kept in people's rooms are accurate and complete?
- 03How were staff trained and supported after the care record system changed?
- 04How will you ensure care plans continue to reflect changing needs, preferences and communication needs?
- 05What progress has been made with the manager's application to register?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering the home and care provided, with ratings given for all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 April 2020 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 Tree Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 February 2019.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.