CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beechy Knoll Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured about most infection control measures, including testing, admissions, protective equipment and visiting. They found a cleaner's trolley stored in a way that posed a cross-contamination risk, and some areas lacked cleaning schedules.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found generally good COVID-19 safety measures, with improvements needed to cleaning arrangements and vaccination records.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 21 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home.
The home supported regular testing for people and staff, checked that new residents had recently tested negative, and provided staff with infection control training and enough protective equipment. Visits were being allowed under the guidance in place at the time.
Inspectors found some areas to improve. A cleaner's trolley was stored in a way that could cause cross-contamination, some areas did not have cleaning schedules, and records of COVID-19 vaccination checks needed improvement.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not provide a full quality rating for the home or ratings for all five areas.
Regular testing
The home supported regular COVID-19 testing for people and staff. Staff were expected to complete a lateral flow test before each shift.
“The provider was supporting people who used the service and staff to access regular testing for COVID-19, to try to limit any potential outbreak in the service.” from the report
Safe admissions
The home checked that people moving in had recently tested negative for COVID-19 before they arrived.
“Appropriate checks were undertaken before people moved into the home to reduce the risk of infection being introduced to the service.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff had infection control training and the home had enough protective equipment available.
“Staff had received training about how to keep people safe from the risk of infection and how to use personal protective equipment (PPE) correctly.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home was facilitating visits under the guidance in place at the time. Visitors were asked for evidence of a same-day lateral flow test and to wear protective equipment.
“The provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the current guidance.” from the report
Cleaner’s trolley
needs fixingA cleaner's trolley was stored in the upstairs sluice room. Inspectors said this posed a risk of cross-contamination, and the registered manager agreed to prevent it happening again.
“We found a cleaner's trolley had been stored in the upstairs sluice room which posed a risk of cross-contamination of the cleaning equipment.” from the report
Cleaning schedules
needs fixingSome areas, including the laundry, did not have cleaning schedules to show that rooms and equipment would be cleaned regularly. The registered manager said one would be introduced.
“Some areas of the home, such as the laundry, did not have a cleaning schedule in place to help ensure all areas of the room and equipment were regularly cleaned.” from the report
Vaccination records
minorThe home was meeting the vaccination requirement in place at the time, but inspectors found that records of these checks needed improvement.
“We identified that some improvements were needed to the records made of these checks and we signposted the registered manager to resources to develop their approach in this area.” from the report
- 01Has the cleaner's trolley been moved, and how do you now prevent cleaning equipment from causing cross-contamination?
- 02Are cleaning schedules now in place for every area, including the laundry, and are completed schedules checked?
- 03How are COVID-19 vaccination checks for staff and visiting professionals recorded now?
- 04What staffing pressures is the home currently experiencing, and how are these managed without affecting care?
- 05What are the current rules for visits, testing and protective equipment?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 March 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, August 2019
Beechy Knoll Care Home was rated Good overall, but inspectors found that staffing arrangements and some medicines records required improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 17 July 2019. The inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They reviewed care, medicines, staff and management records, observed daily life and checked the building.
People generally felt safe and said staff were kind, respectful and responsive. Care was personalised, staff received training, and people were involved in decisions. The home had activities, although people said they became bored when the activities coordinator was away.
The overall rating was Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because communal areas were sometimes left without enough staff oversight and some 'when required' medicines lacked adequate instructions. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives said staff were kind, caring and respectful. Inspectors observed positive interactions and staff supporting people's privacy and independence.
“People told us staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, histories and support needs. People and relatives were involved in planning care.
“People's care records contained enough detail about the support they required from staff.” from the report
Safeguarding and risk systems
Staff knew how to respond to suspected abuse. Risks were assessed and reviewed, and the home had emergency plans and regular safety checks.
“People's care records contained risk assessments detailing the specific risks posed to them.” from the report
Staffing in communal areas
seriousWhen staff were helping people in their rooms, communal areas were sometimes left without enough oversight. Inspectors observed periods of about 20 minutes when people needed support to stay safe.
“Throughout the day we observed periods of around 20 minutes where staff were not available to support people in communal areas.” from the report
Instructions for 'when required' medicines
seriousSome medicines prescribed to be given when needed did not have a matching protocol for staff to follow. One protocol did not contain enough information.
“Some PRN medicines did not have a corresponding protocol for staff to follow and one protocol did not contain enough information.” from the report
Lunch experience
needs fixingPeople were offered only juice at lunch, with no other cold or hot drinks. Staff appeared rushed and had little time to engage with people.
“We observed people were only offered juice to drink during their lunch; no other cold drinks or any hot drinks were offered.” from the report
Activities when the coordinator was away
needs fixingPeople enjoyed the activities programme, but there was little for them to do when the activities coordinator was on annual leave.
“People commented that when the activity coordinator was not at work they got bored as other staff did not have time to sit and do things with them.” from the report
Meal choices for some people
minorPeople were verbally offered two meal choices, but visual aids were not used. Some people were unsure what food they had been given.
“Some people were not sure what they had been given.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure communal areas always have enough staff oversight when staff are providing care in people's rooms?
- 02How do staff now receive clear instructions for every 'when required' medicine?
- 03What drinks are offered with lunch now, and how do staff make sure the meal is a calm and engaging experience?
- 04What activities are provided when the activities coordinator is absent?
- 05How do you help people, especially those living with dementia, understand and choose between meal options?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including care, the premises, medicines, staffing and management. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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.
Every inspection of Beechy Knoll Care Home
4 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.