We carried out a review of the data available to us about Beacon View Home for Older People on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Beacon View Home for Older People, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had established systems to prevent visitors from spreading and catching infections. They had followed guidance on supporting safe visiting including by displaying notices at the entrance to the home advising people not to enter if experiencing symptoms of COVID-19. Visitors were screened for symptoms and their contact details were recorded to support the NHS Test and Trace service. The provider had established an area for facilitating safe visiting called a visiting pod. Technology such as video calling was used to facilitate contact between people and their relatives as well as medical professionals.
The home had spacious sitting areas and a conservatory. Seating had been arranged to support people to social distance. The provider had adapted the layout of the building to support staff to social distance.
The provider followed best practice when people were admitted to the home. People had a negative COVID-19 test before moving into the home and self-isolated in their rooms for 14 days after moving in.
During our visit we observed the staff using Personal Protective Equipment, (PPE) safely. The provider had ensured sufficient stocks of appropriate PPE were available to protect people.
People living in the home and the staff were tested regularly for COVID-19. The provider had also arranged for people and staff to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
The home was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place and frequently touched areas were cleaned regularly throughout the day to reduce the risk of infection.
The provider had detailed and up-to-date infection prevention and control policies and procedures. They sought and acted on advice to further improve infection prevention and control procedures. They were aware of appropriate agencies to contact in the event of an outbreak of COVID-19.
People’s experience of using this service: People told us they felt safe, systems were in place to act on any abuse allegations. Environmental and individual risk assessments had been completed. An ongoing refurbishment plan was taking place.
Sufficient numbers of staff were in place, staff received training relevant to their role and safe recruitment practices were seen. Consent was recorded in people’s care files and relevant deprivation of liberty applications had been submitted. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People told us and we observed people received good care and their privacy, dignity, rights and needs were respected. Care plans reflected people’s individual care needs and how these could be met. A variety of activities was available to people. Electronic systems were used in the service. Systems were in place to deal with complaints.
We received good feedback about the registered manager. Team meetings and feedback from people was obtained. The service was being monitored regularly.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated good (1 September 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous ratings.
Follow up: The service will be re-inspected as per our inspection programme. We will continue to monitor any information we receive about the service. We may bring the next inspection forward if we receive any concerning information.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Beacon View Home for Older People accommodates up to 45 people. There are three units, one of which is specifically for people with dementia. Each unit has lounges and dining areas as well as bedrooms. Accommodation is on two floors and there are two lifts as well as stairs. Accommodation is in single rooms and some of these have en-suite facilities.
The service is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. There is 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.
We found that risk assessments had been undertaken however not all identified risks had been assessed and managed by the service. The personal emergency evacuation plans we saw, did not contain adequate person centred information, to demonstrate how each individual could be best assisted to evacuate the premises, should the need arise.
Staff spoke knowledgably regarding medicines management and confirmed that they were trained appropriately. We looked at how people were protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm and abuse. We found that the service followed safeguarding reporting systems as outlined in its policies and procedures.
We looked at how the service gained people’s consent to care and treatment in line with the MCA. We found that the principles of the MCA were not consistently embedded in practice.
The premises were adapted to suit the needs of the people who lived there. The décor in the communal areas was welcoming and homely. The service had considered best practice guidance around dementia care when decorating the home.
The staff approached people in a caring, kind and friendly manner. We observed lots of positive interactions throughout the inspection. We observed staff speaking with people who lived in the home in a respectful and dignified manner. Staff understood the needs of people they supported and it was obvious that trusting relationships had been created.
People's views had been gathered using effective systems. These included regular resident and staff meetings. A number of audits were undertaken to help ensure that quality of the service, however, some of the audits lacked details of actions to improve the service. We found the registered manager receptive to feedback and keen to improve the service
We have made some recommendations about risk assessments, personal emergency evacuation plans, robust action plans following audits and ensuring the principles of the Mental Capacity Act are embedded in all practice.
People living at the home spoke highly of the staff team and the support they received. Relatives also expressed confidence in the staff team. Comments included; 'My mother is so much better having moved here. She is much improved. The staff really do care.' And 'You can't fault it.'
Files contained good information about people's nutritional needs and preferences. The majority of people we spoke with were happy with the meals. Comments included; 'The food is very good.' And 'You can always have a sandwich or a snack if you don't want the meal.' Health professionals such as dieticians were involved as appropriate.
The home was split into three units, with one being for people with dementia. Bathrooms and shower rooms were designed for people with disabilities and consideration had been given to meeting the environmental needs of people with dementia. Pictures, symbols and signs were used on bathroom and toilet doors, to aid recognition.
Staff were recruited effectively and received appropriate training, professional development, supervision and appraisal. This helped to ensure care was delivered safely and to an appropriate standard. One member of staff told us; 'The manager's door is always open. We get very good support and advice.'
People benefited from safe quality care. Quality was monitored and risks were identified and managed.
Staff told us that they were "happy" working here and that they got good training and good support from managers.
We observed that staff treated people with respect and dignity. We observed good team working and saw that care plans were used appropriately by staff. We observed people being supported to make choices and having their choices respected.
We saw examples of policies, systems and procedures including learning from lessons being used to promote quality. We saw that care plans respected individuals and took into account their strengths and preferences as well as their needs.
Individuals are supported to maintain their independence. One person told us that she likes to keep her bedroom clean and tidy herself and another person makes a daily visit to the newsagents to buy newspapers for other service users. This is encouraged and supported by staff.
We saw that service users are supported to make informed choices, such as what to eat and what to wear, as part of day to day life at the home. One person at the home had stated that they did not wish to have further hospital tests regarding a health problem and this wish was respected and supported.
End of life care plans are in place and we were told that staff from the home, supported by local district nurses, had worked together to support an individual to remain at the home, as were her wishes and not be transferred to hospital. This is a good practice example of professionals working together to support the decision made by this person.
The service users we spoke to told us that they enjoyed the meals provided. The meal time we observed was calm and unhurried.
Service users told us that the domestic staff keep the home clean and tidy. One person told us how she likes to keep her own bedroom tidy and dust her own bedroom, which she is able to do and that staff then vacuum the carpet for her.
Each bedroom has a call system in place. We spoke to some service users about assistance during the night and were told that staff come quickly when called for.