Archived: Beechcroft Care Home

Updated 12 March 2022

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC's response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice is safe and that services are compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 10 February 2022 and was unannounced.

Updated 12 March 2022

Beechcroft Care Home is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Beechcroft Care Home is registered to accommodate 40 people. At the time of our inspection 36 people were using the service. The service accommodates people in one building and support is provided on one floor with three lounge areas and three dining areas. A garden and enclosed patio were also available that people could access.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At our last inspection on 26 September 2016 we found the provider was not meeting all the regulations that we checked and we rated the home as Requires Improvement. We asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led to at least good. We found these improvements had been made and we have rated the service as Good overall. Although we did not find any breaches of the regulations, further improvements were needed to ensure the service is responsive to people’s holistic needs. Such as ensuring activities are available on a daily basis for people to participate in and that opportunities for people to socialise with each other are available within all communal areas. The registered manager had identified this and was taking action to address this.

People confirmed and we saw that there was enough staff to meet people’s needs. Individual risks to people and environmental risks were identified and staff were available to minimise these risks and maintain people’s safety.

Records were available and we saw checks on staff had been undertaken prior to employment, to confirm the staff were of good character and suitable to support people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. When decisions were made in their best interests their rights were protected. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Reviews of people’s care were undertaken on a monthly basis and people and relatives confirmed that they were consulted and involved.

Our observations and discussions with people and their relatives confirmed the staff were considerate and caring. We saw the staff knew people well and had a good relationship with them; they took the time to stop and chat with people throughout the day.

Staff were clear on their role on protecting people from the risk of harm and understood their responsibilities to raise concerns. There were processes in place for people to raise any complaints and express their views and opinions about the service provided.

Assistive technology was in place to support people to keep safe. Staff were provided with the right training and support to enable them to meet people’s needs. People were supported with their dietary needs and to access healthcare services to maintain good health. Systems were in place to prevent and control the risk of infection.

People who used the service and their relatives were involved in developing the service; which promoted an open and inclusive culture. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service to enable the registered manager and provider to drive improvement. We saw these were being used effectively to make the improvements required.