CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Beeches
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with some pressure on staffing and activities still being developed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 18 October 2022. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. People and relatives spoke positively about the care. People said they felt safe and happy, and inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions.
The inspection followed an earlier Requires Improvement rating, published in June 2022. Inspectors found improvements in risk records, care planning, the home environment, activities and management checks. Staffing was considered safe, although staff could be busy and the home could benefit from more staff.
Effective was not inspected as a separate key question in this visit. The overall rating used this inspection's findings together with ratings carried over from the previous inspection where questions were not inspected.
Personalised care
Care plans gave staff clear information about people's preferences, needs and how they wanted to be supported.
“Care plans were person-centred and included detailed information about how people preferred to be cared for.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw positive interactions. People said staff respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respected their privacy. We observed staff encouraging people's privacy and independence in a kind and nurturing way.” from the report
Improved risk management
Risk assessments had been updated when people's needs changed. The home had also made environmental safety improvements.
“Individual risk assessments were detailed and person-centred. Where people's needs had recently changed or new risks had been identified, this had been reviewed and records were updated.” from the report
Active management oversight
The management team used audits and feedback to identify shortfalls, investigate concerns and improve practice.
“The provider promoted an open and transparent culture in the service and the registered manager understood their responsibilities of duty of candour.” from the report
Staff could be busy
minorInspectors considered staffing levels safe, but feedback suggested the home could benefit from more staff to ease pressure and support activities.
“Feedback indicated staffing levels were safe, but the service could benefit from additional staffing to ease the busy environment.” from the report
Activities programme still developing
minorPeople had access to activities and inspectors saw people taking part, but the wider activities programme was not yet fully established.
“The provider was developing their activities programme. Staff supported people to engage in independent activities of their choosing.” from the report
- 01How many staff are on duty at different times, and what has changed since inspectors said the home could benefit from additional staffing?
- 02What activities are now available each week, and how are people helped to take part?
- 03What further improvements have been made since the inspection in October 2022?
- 04How are care plans and risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 05How can relatives raise a concern, and how will the home tell us what action was taken?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led; Effective was not inspected as a separate key question and ratings for questions not inspected were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 November 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.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; safety and management had improved, but some risks were not fully assessed and changes still needed to become established.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 20 April 2022. Inspectors looked at Safe, Effective and Well-led. They spoke with people, visitors and staff, checked care and training records, and reviewed audits and other records.
The home had made substantial improvements since its previous Inadequate rating. Medicines were managed more safely, staff had suitable training, and checks on quality had become more effective. People said they felt safe and happy, liked the staff and enjoyed the food.
The rating was still Requires Improvement overall. Some risk assessments did not cover all relevant needs, and some improvements were recent and needed to become routine. Effective was rated Good, while Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement.
The previous inspection found multiple breaches, but this inspection found the home was no longer in breach. It had been in Special Measures, but it was no longer rated Inadequate and had left Special Measures.
Safer medicines
The home had improved how it assessed, recorded and administered medicines. Audits were finding and correcting mistakes or missing information.
“The Improvements made ensured people received their medicines as prescribed and medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Trained and supported staff
Staff received role-related training and supervision. Inspectors found people considered staff knowledgeable and competent.
“The provider had training systems in place to make sure staff received essential training in health and safety.” from the report
Respect for choices
The home followed the Mental Capacity Act principles. People were asked for consent, and best-interest processes were used when people could not make particular decisions.
“The service was working within the principles of the MCA.” from the report
Improved environment
Bathrooms and toilets had been refurbished, and work had been done on the garden, decoration, flooring and dementia-friendly signs.
“Bathrooms and toilets had been refitted to a high standard.” from the report
Some risks not fully assessed
needs fixingRisk assessments were clearer and more personalised, but some did not sufficiently cover sensory impairment and parts of people's physical and mental health. This meant further work was needed to reduce avoidable risk.
“However, there were areas of need that were relevant but were not sufficiently developed for some people.” from the report
Improvements not yet embedded
needs fixingThe stronger management and checking systems were relatively new. The home needed to show that these improvements continued consistently in everyday practice.
“However, some of the improvements were relatively recent and needed time to be embedded into practice.” from the report
Fire door damage
needs fixingInspectors found damage to some fire doors. The provider acted immediately, but this was a safety issue identified during the visit.
“We noted damage to some fire doors and the provider took action to address this immediately.” from the report
- 01Which people's risk assessments still need developing, particularly for sensory impairment and physical or mental health needs?
- 02How will you check that the recent improvements in medicines, care planning, records and fire safety remain consistent?
- 03What action was taken on the damaged fire doors, and have all the necessary checks been completed?
- 04How will you continue to monitor medicines records and correct any omissions or inaccuracies?
- 05What were the previous ratings for Caring and Responsive, and when were those areas last fully inspected?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 June 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 The Beeches
8 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2022Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2021InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 November 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
92 live-in carers within about an hour of Wakefield
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 £1,260 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
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.