CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Benoni Nursing Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, risk management, infection control and medicines systems were found to be safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and people were supported with healthcare, food and drink. Inspectors recommended improving the mealtime experience because meals were not generally social occasions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions. However, care records did not clearly show that people had been involved in their care plan reviews.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly updated. Activities were not always relevant or meaningful to everyone, and there was little evidence of one-to-one activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Management systems and audits had improved, and staff felt supported. Some care plans contained little information about people's life histories, and newsletters and opportunities for people to share views were not regular.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Benoni Nursing Home Limited was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but mealtimes and activities needed improvement.
This was an unannounced re-inspection on 1 October 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment, training, incident and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable risk assessments, kind interactions and care plans that reflected people's needs and wishes.
The inspectors identified areas to improve. Mealtimes were not usually social, activities were not always meaningful or individual, and records did not always show people's involvement in care planning or end-of-life discussions.
The previous inspection had rated the home Requires Improvement and found breaches in consent and governance. At this inspection, the inspectors found enough improvement and said the home was no longer in breach. The conditions linked to the previous inspection had been met.
Safe medicines
People received their medicines safely and on time. Staff were trained and checked regularly to make sure they remained competent.
“People received their medicines safely and on time.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The home had two nurses and six care workers during the day, with one nurse and two care workers at night.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors observed staff checking people's comfort, responding to requests and respecting people's choices.
“We observed many kind and caring interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Improved management
The home had strengthened its monitoring and governance after the previous inspection. Audits were being used to identify and address improvements.
“The registered manager and the provider had been effective in improving the service provided to people at Benoni.” from the report
Mealtimes
needs fixingPeople generally ate and drank in their usual seats rather than sharing a social meal. Inspectors recommended getting advice on improving the mealtime experience.
“Meals were eaten by people in silence, with the TV playing in the background.” from the report
Activities
needs fixingActivities did not always match people's interests, and there was little evidence of one-to-one activities or people's involvement in planning. People's views about activities were mixed.
“However, these activities were not always person-centred, relevant and meaningful to everyone.” from the report
Care plan involvement
minorCare records did not clearly show that people had taken part in their care plan reviews. The manager said people and families were offered that opportunity.
“Care plans did not clearly indicate that people had been involved in their own care plan reviews.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
needs fixingCare plans did not always show that people or families had been asked about their end-of-life wishes. Staff were also not always encouraging these discussions or recording when someone did not want to take part.
“Care plans however, did not always show that people, or if appropriate their families, had been asked for their views and wishes about how they wished to be cared for at the end of their lives.” from the report
Dementia signage
minorThere was little pictorial signage in toilets and bathrooms. Inspectors said this did not help people living with dementia identify their surroundings.
“There was little pictorial signage on the toilets/bathrooms.” from the report
- 01How are mealtimes now made social, and can my relative choose where and when to eat?
- 02How will activities be matched to my relative's interests, including one-to-one activities if they spend time in their room or bed?
- 03How will you record my relative's involvement in care plan reviews?
- 04How will you discuss and record my relative's end-of-life wishes, including if they do not want to have that discussion?
- 05What improvements have been made since this 2019 inspection, particularly to communal areas and dementia-friendly signage?
This was an unannounced re-inspection covering all five CQC questions to check improvements required after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 October 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, October 2018
Benoni Nursing Home Limited was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but serious weaknesses in legal safeguards and management oversight.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 11 September 2018. Inspectors spoke with people, staff and a visitor, observed care, checked the building, and reviewed care files, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Responsive. People said they felt safe and were treated kindly. Medicines, staffing, risk assessments, meals, activities and personalised care were generally well managed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found that staff and managers did not always follow the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards correctly. Systems for monitoring care, including catheter changes and dressings, were not reliable. The home had no registered manager.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, although inspectors recognised improvements since earlier inspections in medicines, staffing, records and the premises. Regulation 11 and Regulation 17 were breached again.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that people received their medicines as prescribed. Medicine storage, records, training and audits had improved.
“From these records it could be seen that people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity, respect and compassion.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Staffing and teamwork
The home had no staff vacancies and inspectors found enough suitably skilled staff on duty. Staff said they felt supported and morale was good.
“There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences and backgrounds. Staff knew people well and responded to changes in their care.
“People received care and support that was responsive to their needs because staff had a good knowledge of the people who lived at the service.” from the report
Improved records
Inspectors found that care records and monitoring charts had become more timely and easier to follow compared with the previous inspection.
“The quality of the records kept by staff had improved.” from the report
People's legal rights
seriousThe home did not consistently follow the Mental Capacity Act or manage DoLS applications and authorisations properly. Some old consent forms and inaccurate information about family legal powers remained in care files.
“People's rights were not always protected because the manager did not always act in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.” from the report
Missed nursing task
seriousManagement did not have a reliable system for tracking catheter and dressing changes. Inspectors found that one person's catheter had not been changed on the required date.
“One person had required their catheter to be changed on a specific date and this had not taken place.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousSome care file audits were not evidenced, and not all areas of care were regularly monitored. This was a repeated breach of the governance regulation.
“Despite a system of audits to ensure quality in some areas of the service was checked, maintained, and where necessary improved, some areas were not regularly audited.” from the report
Missing dementia signage
needs fixingThe home still did not have the promised pictorial or clear door signs to help people living with dementia recognise bedrooms and find their way around.
“Despite repeated assurances from the provider at the last two inspections there continued to be a lack of appropriate pictorial signage” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager in post and no application was in progress at the time of inspection. The provider said it was advertising for a new manager.
“The service did not have a registered manager in post and no application in process.” from the report
- 01How are you now recording best-interest decisions and checking that DoLS applications and authorisations are current and correctly recorded?
- 02How do you confirm that a relative has the legal authority to make health and welfare decisions?
- 03What system now tracks catheter changes, dressings and other nursing tasks so none are missed?
- 04Have all promised dementia-friendly signs been installed on bedroom doors and toilets?
- 05Who is managing the home now, and what is the plan and timescale for appointing a registered manager?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating, with improvements and repeated concerns considered against the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 October 2018 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 Benoni Nursing Home Limited
6 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- June 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 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
10 live-in carers within about two hours of Cornwall
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 £980 to £1,200 a week. 8 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“He had been a little anxious before she arrived, but has since stated that he would be very happy for her to care for him again”
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.