CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Beach
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care, but concerns about staffing, leadership, consent and person-centred support.
This was an unannounced inspection. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience visited on 19 June 2023. They met seven people, spoke with eight staff and five relatives, and checked care plans, medicines, training, recruitment and management records.
People were treated kindly and supported to make choices, stay in touch with relatives and take part in activities. Medicines and infection control were managed safely. However, staff did not always have the skills to support someone during distress, staffing was very low and agency staff were used regularly.
Inspectors also found weaknesses in mental capacity decisions, dental access, records and management oversight. The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective and Well-led were Requires Improvement, while Caring and Responsive were Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said they were happy with the staff. Inspectors saw warm and respectful interactions, and staff supported people at their own pace.
“Staff were kind and patient with people. Information was provided in ways people could understand” from the report
Activities and community access
People were supported to go out, use local facilities and take part in activities suited to their interests.
“During the day of our inspection, people went paddling in the sea, played football on the beach, went shopping, attended medical appointments and went to the gym.” from the report
Insufficient permanent staffing
needs fixingThe home employed about half the staff it needed and relied heavily on agency workers. Although inspectors found enough staff were on duty to keep people safe, relatives said changing staff affected people's routines and support.
“The service was understaffed and currently employed approximately 50% of the staff needed to support people.” from the report
Support during distress
seriousStaff did not consistently have the training and skills needed to support one person safely during periods of distress. The report says this contributed to a breach of person-centred care requirements.
“Staff did not have the skills and knowledge necessary to provide person-centred care for people while distressed.” from the report
Mental capacity and restrictive decisions
seriousCapacity assessments and best-interest decisions were not consistently made for specific decisions. The restrictive balcony structure was installed without the necessary assessments and did not protect the person's dignity.
“The new provider had failed to assess people's capacity in relation to specific decisions.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousThere was no registered manager, senior posts were vacant and important records and checks were not consistently reviewed. Inspectors found that learning from incidents was not always acted on.
“The provider had failed to ensure the service's governance system were effective.” from the report
Delayed dental care
needs fixingOne person had reported tooth pain, but a dental appointment had not been arranged even though staff had noted plans to do so. There was also no clear monitoring information about one person's weight or nutrition.
“This appointment had not been arranged and the person confirmed they had not seen the dentist although the pain had now reduced.” from the report
- 01How many permanent staff and senior carers are now in post, and how often are agency staff used?
- 02What training do all staff now have for supporting people during distress and using positive behaviour support techniques?
- 03How are capacity assessments, best-interest decisions and DoLS conditions now recorded and reviewed?
- 04What action has been taken about the restrictive balcony structure, and how were the person's dignity and views considered?
- 05How do managers now check care records, incident learning, health appointments and nutrition monitoring?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered service and covered all five key questions; the last rating under the previous provider was Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 August 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.
Every inspection of The Beach
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- August 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2022Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 November 2022.
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.