Beechdale House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed one quality statement in the effective key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last assessment, which was good. The assessment of these areas indicated areas of improvement since the last assessment, our rating for the key question therefore remains good. Peoples needs and rights were supported. Peoples care and treatment was effective due to their health, care, well-being, and communication needs being assessed robustly. Peoples care plans are kept up to date with any assessments completed in a timely manner. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and respected these in a person-centred way. People were aware of their rights around care and treatment. Staff showed an understanding of the mental capacity act, including capacity and consent. Staff were aware of how to support someone with fluctuating capacity.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We saw people and their relatives had been involved with planning their care. This information was documented in people’s care plans. People could be confident that their needs were understood by the staff team. We saw from interactions between people and staff that people’s preferences and choices were understood and respected by staff. Beechdale House welcomed relatives and visitors to the service, and we saw many relatives during our visit who were enjoying spending time with their family members.

Staff told us they had time to review care planning documents, so they could keep up to date with people’s changing needs. The clinical lead showed us the updated care plans for people living with skin management needs, and the improvements made to this documentation since our last visit. Staff showed a good knowledge of how to support people’s identified needs, and what action to take if the person’s needs appeared to have changed.

A range of national assessment tools were used, to understand people's needs and how best to support them. For example, where people required support with wound management there were clear plans in place to holistically manage their skin, weight, nutrition & fluid intake, manual handling needs and effectively track the progress of wound healing or escalate to external health teams if required. Staff had access to documents on how to support people. Where people’s needs changed, these care planning documents were updated so staff understood people’s changes in needs. For example, if a person’s mobility reduced, and a person had been referred to the Occupational Therapist for equipment or the Dementia Outreach Team for support with their cognitive needs. People’s communication needs were recorded and understood by staff. This allowed staff to communicate with people, to have a clear understanding of the persons needs. We saw warm and positive interactions between people and staff during our visit. People were enjoying singing and dancing with staff, with one person celebrating their birthday when we visited and enjoying sharing this with the rest of the people at the service.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.