CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Riverwell Beck Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were administered safely and infection control arrangements were effective. They noted that some 'as required' medicines protocols needed more detail.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care was planned around their abilities and preferences. Staff were trained and supported, and people received suitable food, healthcare and equipment.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives praised staff for being kind and considerate. Inspectors saw that people's dignity, privacy, independence and choices were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and staff knew people's preferences and needs. However, activities staff posts were vacant and staff raised concerns that time-specific care tasks might make support less flexible.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff described the home as approachable and well run. The provider and manager carried out audits, acted on shortfalls and were making changes to improve the home.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Blackwell Vale Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but activities and some care records needed attention.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 23 and 24 March 2022. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files and the home's quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines processes, good infection control and personalised care. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect, and their choices were supported.
The home was undergoing major building and refurbishment work. Safety arrangements were in place, but the building was still being improved. Activities staff posts were vacant, so activities were reduced, although care staff were trying to provide some activities.
This was the first inspection since the service became registered under the current provider. The previous provider's rating, published in March 2020, was Requires Improvement.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives praised staff for their kindness. Inspectors found that people were treated with dignity and encouraged to remain independent.
“People praised the staff for their care and kindness. Staff were friendly and engaging.” from the report
Safe care
Risks were assessed and reviewed, staffing levels were considered sufficient during the inspection, and infection control arrangements were in place.
“The service was safe. Risks to people's health and safety were managed without compromising their independence.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's individual needs, preferences and abilities. Staff were familiar with how each person preferred to be supported.
“People received a personalised service that met their individual needs. Staff were very familiar with each person's preferences and abilities.” from the report
Good food and nutrition support
People had meal choices and support for their dietary needs. Catering staff understood how to provide fortified food and modified textures.
“People had choices about meals and were supported with their individual dietary needs and preferences.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff said the manager was approachable and listened to their views. The provider used audits and action plans to monitor quality.
“The provider and manager worked in an open and transparent way.” from the report
Reduced activities
needs fixingActivities staff posts were vacant, so the programme was reduced and care staff were providing activities when time allowed. A new activities programme was being introduced.
“At the time of this inspection, the posts of lifestyle support staff [activities staff] were vacant so care staff were endeavouring to provide a reduced programme of activity for people where time permitted.” from the report
Some medicines instructions needed more detail
needs fixingThe home's audits found occasional gaps in medicines records, which were addressed. Inspectors said some instructions for 'as required' medicines needed more detail.
“Some protocols for the use of 'as required' medicines would benefit from more detail and this was to be addressed.” from the report
Care tasks needed flexibility
minorStaff were concerned that time-specific tasks in the electronic care system could make support less flexible. Management agreed to address this.
“Staff were a little concerned this would lead to inflexible assistance.” from the report
Refurbishment was ongoing
minorThe home was undergoing extensive building and refurbishment work. Inspectors found that safety measures were in place, but the dementia design improvements were not yet complete.
“At the time of this inspection, extensive refurbishment work was being undertaken to improve the quality of the accommodation and it was intended to improve the dementia design.” from the report
- 01Are the lifestyle support staff posts now filled, and what activities are currently available each week?
- 02What changes were made to the instructions for 'as required' medicines?
- 03How do staff make sure care tasks are provided at the times people prefer rather than only at set times?
- 04Which refurbishment and dementia design improvements have been completed, and what work remains?
- 05How do you check that there are enough staff when there are gaps in the rota?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection since the service became registered under the current provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 May 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.
Every inspection of Riverwell Beck Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 December 2020.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.