CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Beechwood Place Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable safeguarding, recruitment, risk assessment, fire safety and infection control systems. Medicines were administered correctly, but there were minor recording discrepancies involving fridge temperatures and as-needed medicines.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were reviewed when needs changed. Staff had training and support, and people were helped with food, drink and access to health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and visitors described staff as kind, caring and patient. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy, dignity, equality and people's involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and staff knew people's needs, backgrounds and preferences. People could take part in individual and group activities, maintain relationships and record their end of life choices.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open and supportive culture, with managers available to staff. Quality audits and feedback systems were in place, although audits had not identified the medicines recording issues before the inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Beechwood Place Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with minor medicines recording issues to address.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 12 November 2019. One inspector looked around the home, spoke with people, a relative, staff and managers, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported by staff who knew them, and helped with medicines, eating, health care and activities.
People were treated with kindness, privacy and respect. Care plans were personalised and updated, and staff understood people's communication needs and preferences. The home had suitable systems for complaints and end of life choices.
Inspectors found minor inconsistencies in recording fridge temperatures and the number of as-needed medicines given. The management team agreed to address these issues and increase medicines audits. The overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in June 2017.
Kind and respectful care
People and visitors consistently described staff as kind, caring and patient. Inspectors saw staff building good relationships and protecting people's privacy and dignity.
“Feedback from people and visitors consistently described staff as kind, caring and patient.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's needs, choices and preferences. Staff could describe people's current needs and interests without needing to check the care plans.
“Staff had a good knowledge of the people who lived at the service.” from the report
Good health support
The home worked with health professionals and followed advice about nutrition, swallowing and other changing needs.
“The service worked with a wide range of professionals such as general practitioners, dietitians and speech and language therapists to ensure people lived comfortably at the service and their medical needs were met.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to stay in touch with relatives and join activities suited to their interests, including group and one-to-one activities.
“The activity programme was varied and included quizzes, exercise classes, art and crafts and pet therapy.” from the report
Open management
Staff said managers were available and supportive. Residents' views were sought, and suggestions such as menu changes had been acted on.
“There was a clear staffing structure in place, the registered manager and senior staff operated a system whereby neither was on holiday at the same time to ensure staff always had access to managerial support.” from the report
Medicines records
minorInspectors found inconsistent recording of fridge temperatures and the number of as-needed tablets given. They judged this to present only a minor risk, and the provider committed to immediate action.
“We did find some minor discrepancies which, whilst presenting only a minor risk to people, the provider committed to addressing immediately through individual supervision and team meetings.” from the report
Audits missed the issue
needs fixingThe home's regular quality checks had not identified the medicines recording problems before the inspection. The management team said medicines audits would happen more often.
“Whilst these were regularly undertaken they had not always identified areas for improvement such as the medicines issues we raised.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to recording medicines fridge temperatures and as-needed medicines since the inspection?
- 02How often are medicines audits now carried out, and what happens if an error is found?
- 03How will you assess and update my relative's care plan if their health, communication or support needs change?
- 04What activities would be suitable for my relative, including one-to-one activities if they do not join groups?
- 05How will you record and review my relative's end of life wishes, including any religious preferences and resuscitation decisions?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the home and care provided, with all five CQC questions rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 2019 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, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 May 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable care plans, respectful support and effective checks on the quality of care.
The previous inspection found too few staff at important times and not enough support for staff. At this inspection, staffing had improved, a registered manager was in post, and regular supervision and appraisals had been introduced. The earlier breach had been resolved.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff on duty to respond to people in a timely way. Buzzers were answered promptly and staff were visible throughout the inspection.
“Observations throughout the day demonstrated that there was enough staff on duty to support people.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were checked for 27 people and were completed accurately. Controlled medicines, storage temperatures and staff checks were also properly managed.
“We reviewed the MARs for 27 people and saw they had been completed accurately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff asking permission to enter rooms and protecting privacy during personal care.
“We observed staff interacting with people throughout the day. We saw staff were polite and sensitive to people's needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to join activities or receive one-to-one time if they preferred not to join group activities. Relatives and friends could visit at any time.
“The activities coordinator visited people daily to offer one to one interactions.” from the report
Improved management
A registered manager was in post and staff received regular supervision and meetings. Quality audits were completed monthly and action plans were used to address issues.
“At this inspection, we found the registered provider had implemented their action plan and progress had been made.” from the report
Agency staff knowledge
needs fixingSome people and relatives were concerned that agency staff did not always have the right skills or know people's needs. The home said it used regular agency staff and paired unfamiliar agency workers with experienced staff.
“The full time staff here are outstandingly trained, the agency staff are not. They don't know the residents or their needs.” from the report
Care plan involvement not always recorded
needs fixingCare plans were person-centred, but there was little written evidence showing who had been involved in developing them.
“There was little evidence to document who had been involved in the development of the care plans.” from the report
Unclear door signage
minorSome doors did not have suitable signs. One bathroom was being used for storage but was open and had no sign saying it was out of use. Bedroom doors did not always show names.
“The door to this room was open and accessible for all and there was no signage to notify people that the bathroom was out of use.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure there are enough staff during busy times, including evenings and nights?
- 02How do you check that agency staff understand each resident's needs before working with them?
- 03How do you record the involvement of residents and relatives in developing and reviewing care plans?
- 04What action was taken about the bathroom being open without a sign and bedroom doors not always showing names?
- 05How often are staffing levels, medicines and care plans checked, and can families see the results of these checks?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 June 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 Beechwood Place Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Beechwood Place Nursing Home →
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Beechwood Place Nursing Home →
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 July 2014.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.