CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beechwood
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People and relatives said the home was safe. Staff understood safeguarding, staffing levels were suitable, medicines records were accurate, and risks and incidents were monitored.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, staff had up-to-date training and supervision, and people were supported with food, healthcare and decisions under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptionally kind and personalised care. People and families were involved in decisions, and staff promoted dignity, privacy, independence and personal goals.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was tailored to people's wishes and goals. People were supported with activities, relationships, education, volunteering, work opportunities and developing independent travel skills.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had approachable leadership, a strong teamwork culture and an effective system for checking quality and learning from improvements.
What inspectors found, May 2020
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring and responsive support, with safe, effective and well-led care.
This was a planned inspection over 9 and 10 March and 3 April 2020. The inspector spoke with six people, seven staff members and four relatives. Records about care, medicines, recruitment and management were also checked.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found highly personalised care, kind staff and strong support for independence, choice and community involvement. People were supported with activities, volunteering, work opportunities and learning new skills.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Caring and Responsive. The overall rating was Outstanding, improving from Good at the previous inspection.
Highly personal care
Staff knew people well and adapted support to their individual needs, preferences and goals.
“The eight service users are all totally different, we adopt different ways for each person.” from the report
Independence and community life
People were supported to gain skills, pursue interests and take part in social, educational, volunteering and work opportunities.
“People had been supported to achieve many goals including holidays, short breaks, budgeting, losing weight, improving fitness and travelling independently.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Staffing levels met people's needs, staff responded quickly, and medicines records showed what people had received.
“Staff maintained accurate records to show which medicines people had received.” from the report
Involvement and respect
People and families were central to care decisions. Staff promoted privacy, dignity, independence and choice.
“Staff involved people so they were always central to decisions made about their care or treatment options.” from the report
Effective oversight
The registered manager was approachable and the provider used quality checks to identify improvements and lessons learned.
“The provider had an effective quality assurance system which successfully identified areas for improvement and lessons learnt.” from the report
Size of the service
minorThe home was larger than recommended by best practice guidance. Inspectors said its organisation still ensured people received individual, person-centred support.
“The service is larger than recommended by best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure my relative receives support tailored to their own needs, preferences and goals?
- 02What opportunities would my relative have for activities, education, volunteering, work or independent travel?
- 03How would you support my relative to take medicines safely, and how would you tell us about any medicines problems?
- 04How would you involve my relative and our family in decisions about care and treatment?
- 05How does the layout and size of the home affect people's privacy, independence and individual support?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and the care provided; all five ratings were reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 May 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.
What inspectors found, July 2017
Beechwood was rated Good overall; inspectors found especially strong personalised support that helped people become more independent.
Inspectors visited on 27 and 28 February 2017. They spoke with all eight people living in the home, looked around the building and reviewed care, recruitment, training and quality records. They also considered information from the provider, commissioners and other professionals.
The home was safe, effective, caring and well-led, all rated Good. Responsive care was rated Outstanding. People were involved in their own support, daily choices and household tasks, and were supported to take part in work, volunteering, education and leisure activities.
The home had been rated Good at the previous inspection. Inspectors had then asked for risk assessments about independent living skills to be updated. At this inspection, they found these assessments had been improved and were up to date.
Growing independence
People were supported to make their own decisions and develop practical skills. This included independent travel, shopping, cooking, managing medicines and finances.
“The service enhanced their skills, independence and lifestyle.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People took part in paid work, volunteering, community classes and leisure activities that they found purposeful and enjoyable.
“People felt they had been supported to find meaningful occupations in the community which they found fulfilling, purposeful and enjoyable.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans described each person's abilities, goals, needs and ways autism affected them. People helped create and review their own plans.
“Support plans were personalised and identified the areas of daily living that people could already do independently as well what areas they were working towards.” from the report
Warm relationships
People described staff as caring and supportive. Inspectors observed friendly conversation, shared laughter and respectful support.
“There were clearly amicable, warm relationships between people and staff.” from the report
Updated risk assessments
The shortfall identified at the previous inspection had been addressed. Inspectors found risk assessments were current and reviewed regularly.
“Risk assessment records were up to date, fully involved the person and were kept under regular review.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative to build independence while keeping their agreed risks under review?
- 02What paid work, volunteering, education and leisure activities could be available for my relative?
- 03How would my relative help create and review their own support plan?
- 04How would staff support my relative's particular communication needs, anxieties or phobias?
- 05How are people involved in choosing which staff member supports them with activities?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 July 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
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- May 2020Outstandingcurrent ratingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 February 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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
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 £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.