CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Beverley Court Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Beverley Court Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some minor record-keeping issues.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 and 20 June 2019. The inspector spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable healthcare support and good support with food and drink.
People were treated kindly and with dignity. Staff knew people's needs and preferences, activities were available, and people and relatives felt able to raise concerns.
Some minor issues were found and addressed during the inspection. These included incomplete care and risk information, medicine recording errors, a missing best-interests record and a delay in answering one complaint. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Kind and respectful care
Staff built good relationships with people and promoted privacy, dignity and independence. People appeared comfortable and relaxed.
“Staff had developed good relationships with people and were friendly and caring towards them.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, a safe recruitment process and medicines generally managed safely.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and people received care in a timely way.” from the report
Good support with health and food
People's health was monitored and staff worked with health professionals. Dietary needs were met and people were seen enjoying meals.
“People were supported to meet their nutritional needs. People's dietary requirements were met and nutritional needs monitored.” from the report
Incomplete care and risk information
needs fixingSome information from health professionals had not been transferred into care plans or risk assessments. Staff knew the relevant needs, and the manager updated the records.
“However, we found some information from health professionals had not been transferred on to people's care plans or risk assessments.” from the report
Medicine recording and guidance
needs fixingInspectors found minor recording errors. Some medicines to be given when needed did not have enough guidance, although this was addressed during the inspection.
“There were some minor recording errors and some medicines prescribed for use 'as and when required' were missing guidance or required more detail to guide staff on when to use them.” from the report
Some records and plans still being developed
needs fixingOne best-interests decision had no record. Communication forms, personalised activity plans and end of life training were also still being developed.
“We found a missing record for one decision which had been made in a person's best interests.” from the report
Delay in one complaint response
minorOne complaint had not been answered promptly. The manager was taking steps to prevent this happening again.
“There had been a delay in responding to one complaint, but the registered manager was taking steps to prevent this reoccurring.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that information from health professionals is added promptly to care plans and risk assessments?
- 02What changes were made to medicine audits and guidance for medicines given as and when required?
- 03Have personalised activity plans and the communication forms now been completed for each person?
- 04What training and support do staff now receive for end of life care?
- 05How do you make sure complaints are answered without delay?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says the ratings in each area remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 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.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Beverley Court Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with a medicines shortfall that the home said it had fixed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 14 November 2016. One inspector visited, spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, checked records and toured the building.
The home was rated Good in all five areas. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines handling, suitable training, good food and access to healthcare. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and their choices were recorded.
The previous inspection in February 2016 found three regulations were not met. This inspection found the home had completed the required improvements, including work on consent, decision-making, gathering views and reporting incidents to the CQC. Inspectors did find missing guidance for some medicines given only when needed, but the home said this was addressed as a priority.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy, dignity and people's choices.
“During observations it was clear caring relationships had developed between the people who used the service and staff.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw evidence of recruitment checks before staff started work.
“Staff, who had been recruited safely, were provided in enough numbers to meet the needs of the people who used the service.” from the report
Good support with food and health
The home offered food suited to people's preferences and dietary needs. A range of healthcare professionals were involved when required.
“People were supported to eat a balanced diet of their choosing; dietary requirements were catered for, for example, high calorific fortified diets and diabetic diets.” from the report
Activities for different needs
The home had a dedicated activities coordinator. Activities included one-to-one support for people living with dementia as well as group activities.
“The service employed a dedicated activities coordinator.” from the report
Improvements after the previous inspection
The home had acted on the earlier inspection's concerns about consent, decision-making, feedback and notifications to the CQC.
“We looked at the improvements they told us they had made at this inspection and found they had complied with the regulations.” from the report
Guidance for 'as and when' medicines
needs fixingInspectors found there were not enough written protocols for medicines given only when needed. The home said this would be addressed as a priority, and later confirmed it had been done.
“We did find that there was a lack of protocols for the administration of 'as and when' required medicines.” from the report
- 01What written protocols are now in place for medicines given only when needed?
- 02How do you check that these medicines are given for the right reason and recorded correctly?
- 03How will you involve my relative or their representative in care plan reviews and decisions?
- 04What activities would be available for someone who prefers one-to-one support or spends much of their time in their room?
- 05How do you use feedback from residents and relatives to make changes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall quality of the service and all five CQC questions, including follow-up checks on actions from the February 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 December 2016 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 Beverley Court Residential Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Beverley Court Residential Home →
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Beverley Court Residential Home →
- March 2016Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Hull, City of
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 £1,350 a week. 12 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.