CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Belchford
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective safeguarding, risk management, staffing, medicines and infection control arrangements. They also found that incidents were reviewed and lessons were identified.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit, although inspectors described positive relationships and respectful support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit, although staff were found to support daily choices, activities and access to the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a person-centred culture, approachable management, regular feedback opportunities and effective quality checks.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found people were safe, treated with respect and supported by a well-led home.
This was an announced inspection on 29 March 2023. One inspector reviewed records, spoke with three staff and contacted three relatives. People were unable to give feedback themselves.
The inspection looked at whether the home was safe and well-led, including infection prevention and control. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk checks and effective safeguarding arrangements.
Staff knew people well and supported them with daily choices, activities and access to the community. Inspectors found positive relationships, dignity and respect, and a person-centred culture.
The overall rating was Good. Safe was rated Good and well-led was rated Good. The last rating was also Good, published on 28 November 2017.
Staff know people well
Staff had supported people for a long time and understood their needs. They supported people with choices, activities and community access.
“Staff had supported people for a significant amount of time and knew their needs well.” from the report
Safe systems
The home had systems to protect people from abuse, manage risks and review incidents. Inspectors also found medicines were managed safely.
“The provider had effective systems to help keep people safe from abuse.” from the report
Person-centred culture
Inspectors found that the manager and staff focused on people's individual needs. Relatives and staff said communication and support were positive.
“The home had a person-centred culture and staff worked to provide personalised care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you support my relative to make daily choices and take part in activities?
- 02How often will I be involved in reviewing my relative's care?
- 03How will you keep me informed if there is an incident, safeguarding concern or change in risk?
- 04How do you check that staff remain competent to give medicines safely?
- 05What improvements are currently on the home's action plan?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were not given in this report and the previous overall rating was Good in 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 May 2023 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, November 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 19 October 2017. Inspectors reviewed care records, staff files, training records and the home's quality checks. They also observed people, spoke with relatives and staff, and contacted other professionals.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities and complex needs. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and safeguarding procedures. Staff were trained and supported, and people had access to healthcare and support with food and activities.
Care plans were personal and regularly reviewed. People were treated respectfully, supported to make choices and helped to stay involved in family life and the local community. The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection in September 2015.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, with flexibility to increase staffing when required. Recruitment included criminal record checks and references.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Medicine records had no omissions, were completed accurately and were signed. Medicines were stored correctly, and staff's competence was checked.
“We looked at the medicines administration charts (MAR) and found no omissions.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's communication methods, routines, preferences and health information. Relatives were involved in developing and reviewing care plans.
“Each person's care record was very personalised and began with a 'one page profile' which had been developed with the person's relative.” from the report
Respectful and individual support
Staff used verbal and non-verbal communication, supported people to make choices and helped them remain as independent as possible.
“Staff focussed on people's needs and treated people with respect.” from the report
Activities and community links
People took part in activities they enjoyed, both at home and in the community. Examples included walks, music, cinema trips, holidays and visits to local venues.
“Staff supported people to participate in their preferred activities.” from the report
Quality checks and leadership
The provider carried out consistent checks across several areas of care. Relatives and professionals described the manager and staff as accessible and approachable.
“The provider had an effective system of quality assurance checks to ensure people received a good standard of care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you use my relative's communication plan to understand what they want and need?
- 02How will you support my relative's particular dietary, health and medication needs?
- 03What activities and community visits would be available for my relative, based on their interests?
- 04How would you support my relative to leave the building safely in an emergency?
- 05How will the family be involved in best-interest decisions and reviews of the care plan?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; inspectors spoke with one person, two relatives, staff and a social care professional, and reviewed three people's care records. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 November 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 Belchford
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 December 2010.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 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.