CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Beechwood Grove
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and appropriate infection control measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The management team was described as consistent and open, but oversight was not always strong enough. Inspectors found gaps in end of life care planning and in documented learning from accidents and incidents.
What inspectors found, August 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe care, but well-led was Requires Improvement because oversight and records were not always strong enough.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 and 15 July 2022. Two inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and visiting professionals. They observed medicines being given and reviewed care plans, risk records, staff records and management checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe. People said they felt safe, staffing levels were enough, medicines were given safely and recruitment checks had been completed. Risks such as falls, dehydration and pressure damage were being managed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. Inspectors found gaps in end of life care plans and in the recording and follow-up of accidents and incidents. The provider took immediate action and said further staff training had been arranged.
The overall rating stayed Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. The previous overall rating, published in June 2019, was Good.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe and well supported. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“People felt safe at the home and when staff provided their care.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on people's needs and that staff were available when people needed support.
“There were enough staff to support people safely.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and given safely by staff whose training and competence had been checked. Records and medicine audits were also in place.
“Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Families were kept informed
Relatives said the home told them about changes in their family member's health, incidents and other important events.
“Relatives told us they were kept informed and up to date about events at the service and with details of events, incidents and activities involving their loved ones.” from the report
End of life care plans
needs fixingSome people receiving palliative or end of life care did not have a specific plan for staff to follow. Inspectors also saw missed opportunities to provide person-centred and dignified care, although immediate action was taken.
“There was a lack of oversight on care delivery in respect of end of life care.” from the report
Incident records did not always show learning
needs fixingAccidents and incidents were recorded, but records did not always explain what action had been taken to prevent the problem happening again. The home provided evidence that this was addressed during the inspection.
“The systems for recording accidents and incidents were in place, however there was not always documented evidence that stated the immediate action taken to prevent a re-occurrence.” from the report
Possible restrictive practice
minorInspectors asked the home to consider whether lowering some beds to floor level should be covered by a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard, as this might restrict a person's freedom to get out of bed.
“We have asked that peoples who beds were lowered to ground level, be considered under DoLS as it may be restrictive if people wished to get out of bed.” from the report
- 01What specific end of life care plan will be in place for my relative, and how will you make sure care is dignified and person-centred?
- 02What end of life training has staff completed since the inspection, and how is their practice checked?
- 03How do you now record the action taken after an accident or incident and check that lessons have been learned?
- 04Could any equipment or arrangements, including beds lowered to floor level, restrict my relative's freedom, and how would this be considered under DoLS?
- 05How will you explain any changes in my relative's medicines or health to me?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, prompted partly by concerns about care delivery, confidential information and culture; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 August 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 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were safe and effective.
Inspectors visited the home on 14 December 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus outbreak. It looked only at infection prevention and control.
The home had been divided into three units, each with its own staff team. Inspectors found this had helped contain a COVID-19 outbreak to one unit. They also found the home clean and tidy, with cleaning schedules and extra cleaning of high-touch areas.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, PPE, testing, shielding, social distancing, admissions and outbreaks safely. People who had tested positive were cared for in their bedrooms where possible, and staff spent time with them to reduce isolation.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rating for the other care questions.
Contained outbreak
Separate units and dedicated staff teams helped contain the COVID-19 outbreak to one unit.
“The home had been divided into three units. Each unit had its own dedicated staff team.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. A cleaning schedule and extra cleaning of high-touch areas were in place.
“The home was clean and tidy. There was a cleaning schedule which ensured all areas of the home were cleaned in line with current guidance.” from the report
PPE and testing
Staff had adequate PPE, were seen wearing it appropriately, and regular testing was taking place.
“Staff were provided with adequate supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) and staff were seen to be wearing this appropriately.” from the report
Support during isolation
People who tested positive were cared for in their bedrooms where possible. Staff spent time with them to help reduce isolation.
“Staff spent time with people to help ensure they did not feel isolated.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control arrangements are in place now, and how have they changed since the December 2020 inspection?
- 02How are visitors currently supported, and are the two dedicated visiting areas still available?
- 03How are people supported if they need to isolate, so they do not become lonely?
- 04How often are staff and residents tested when there is an infection outbreak?
- 05How are separate staff teams and units used if an outbreak occurs?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the other care questions and the overall rating were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 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 Beechwood Grove
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 June 2018.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.