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.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, staff recruitment checks were completed and medicines were given safely. However, infection risks from the condition of parts of the building and inconsistent water temperature checks were identified.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- The home supported people's nutrition, healthcare, consent and individual needs well. However, the building had not been fully decorated or maintained, with several areas still in disrepair.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their daily routines and care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and reflected people's needs, preferences and communication methods. People were supported to maintain family links, take part in activities and discuss end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had improved its quality monitoring and was no longer in breach of Regulation 17. Audits and incident reviews were in place, although some audit deadlines were not always met and relatives' feedback had reduced.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but the home needed improvement with its environment and water safety checks.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 16 November 2022. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, staff records, training and quality checks.
Overall, the home was rated Good. Safe, caring, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Effective was rated Requires Improvement because parts of the building were in disrepair and had not been fully decorated or maintained.
Inspectors found dirty and stained carpets, damaged paint and chipped skirting boards that made cleaning harder. Some water temperature records were outside the provider's own recommendations and health and safety guidance. The home had improved its quality monitoring since 2019 and was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff were caring and compassionate. People were treated with dignity and their lifestyle choices were respected.
“People were supported by caring and compassionate staff and their lifestyle choices respected.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were detailed and reflected people's needs, preferences and health conditions. Staff knew people's likes and dislikes.
“Improvements had been made to the care planning process and we found care plans were very detailed and reflected people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed and staff had completed medicines training and competency checks.
“Medicines were administered in a safe way, and in line with best practice guidance.” from the report
Improved oversight
The provider had strengthened its governance and quality checks since the previous inspection. It was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.
“Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of Regulation 17.” from the report
Condition of the building
needs fixingSome carpets, doors and skirting boards were dirty, while paint was chipped, peeling or water damaged. This made some areas difficult to clean effectively and contributed to infection risk.
“People were not consistently protected from the risks associated with infection.” from the report
Water temperature checks
needs fixingWater outlet temperatures in some bedrooms were between 32 and 38 degrees and did not match the provider's recommendations or health and safety guidance. Inspectors recommended reviewing current guidance and testing practice.
“This meant the temperatures were not in line with health and safety guidance.” from the report
Repairs and refurbishment
needs fixingFlooring, communal toilets and other parts of the home needed work. Refurbishment had started, but the report says some disrepair had also been highlighted in 2019.
“Many areas of the home were in disrepair.” from the report
Relatives' feedback
minorRelatives had not recently been asked for feedback. The manager said newsletters and questionnaires were being reintroduced.
“However, this had diminished since the pandemic.” from the report
Audit deadlines
minorEnvironmental and infection control audits were being completed, but their planned timescales were not always followed.
“The time frames were not always adhered to.” from the report
- 01What repairs and refurbishment work has been completed since the inspection, and what work is still outstanding?
- 02How are carpets, skirting boards, doors and damaged paint now being cleaned, repaired or replaced?
- 03How are water outlet temperatures checked and recorded now, and how has the home acted on the recommendation about legionella guidance?
- 04How will the home make sure environmental and infection control audits are completed within their planned timescales?
- 05How are relatives now being asked for feedback, and when will newsletters or questionnaires be sent?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on checking the previous Regulation 17 breach, while also reviewing the five key questions and infection control. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 December 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 safety measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, managing testing, preventing infections and keeping its infection control policy up to date. The home was clean, with extra cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.
Visitors were screened for symptoms, required to show a negative lateral flow test and provided with protective equipment. The home was also meeting the vaccination requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide a full overall rating or ratings for the other four areas.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infections. The home was clean and high-touch areas received extra cleaning and disinfection.
“The home looked clean and hygienic. Domestic staff carried out regular cleaning with additional cleaning and disinfection of high touch points such as door handles or handrails.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were screened, tested and given protective equipment. Visits took place in a designated area with arrangements intended to reduce infection risks.
“There was a designated conservatory for people to receive visits in private with a designated walkway to prevent people having to enter the main building.” from the report
COVID-19 safeguards
The home was meeting the vaccination requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Support with COVID-19 decisions
People were supported to understand the pandemic and make informed choices about testing and vaccination. Advocates were included in best-interest decisions where needed.
“The manager and staff ensured that people living at The Beeches fully understood the ongoing pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place to manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19?
- 02How are visitors currently screened, tested and supported to use protective equipment?
- 03How does the home check that infection control procedures remain up to date?
- 04How are new admissions managed safely during infection outbreaks?
- 05How are people supported to make decisions about testing and vaccination if they cannot give consent themselves?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 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
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.