Beechmore Court

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 82 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were supported to genuinely express their wishes and preferences. These were always placed at the centre of their care and support. Managers and staff took their time to get to know people on a personal level. People and their relatives told us they were consulted about their care and support needs which resulted in care plans which were highly personalised, detailed, and reflective of people’s unique histories, preferences, and routines. Staff showed a deep knowledge of each person and consistently placed what mattered to them at the heart of their work.

Activities were planned and delivered in direct response to people’s preferences, enabling individuals to pursue their interests both within the home and in the wider community. One member of staff said, “We always introduce ourselves to any new residents and sit down and have a chat with them about their interests and what they like to do, also what they did when they were at home and when they were younger. From there we would discuss activities that they would enjoy or make up a new activity to help them engage in their new life at Beechmore.”

Extensive, meaningful activities supported people to maintain identity, independence and enjoyment, including gardening, music, and personalised hobbies. People were highly appreciative of the person-centred approach and the range of activities offered. Comments included, “The staff are all incredibly kind, and they know what pleases each of us. We have had some wonderful parties over Christmas, always fun” and “The activities are good and varied…there is always something in the afternoon and sometimes evenings too.”

Staff recognised that not everyone enjoyed group activities and offered 1-2-1 support where necessary. People told us they felt included and able to take part as much or as little as they wished. Comments included, “We are encouraged to socialise and go to activities” and “They offer help but let me do all that I can,”

People also told us staff adapted support and helped them overcome barriers associated with physical disabilities so they could do the things they enjoy doing. One person told us, “I love to knit but my hands are arthritic, so the staff brought me some huge knitting needles, and I can do lacey knit when my hands aren’t too painful.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People and relatives reported continuity of care from familiar staff as a major strength. One person told us, “It is miraculous, but we don’t often see an unfamiliar face.” A relative said, “It is a very stable team and even though we are only here once a month they greet us by name when we come in and update us.”

People’s protected characteristics were recorded. The registered manager told us, “Assessments prompt us to record people's preferences about how they identify, in terms of their sexual orientation, gender, gender reassignment, religious and cultural identity. We are also able to record their preferences around how we address them, including their chosen pronoun.”

The provider understood their responsibility to provide accessible information which supports people’s rights and choices. Pre‑admission assessments and care plans contained detailed information about people’s communication needs. The service used large print or pictorial formats where needed. Food menus, activities timetables and key notices were available in accessible formats, and staff told us they would source interpreters or translated materials when needed.

Staff understood their responsibilities under data protection legislation and only shared personal information on a need‑to‑know basis. Relatives told us communication with them was consistently good and that staff kept them well informed about changes to care or health needs. Observations during inspection confirmed staff took time to explain actions, check understanding, and provide reassurance.

The provider listened to and understood people’s views and wishes. People consistently told us they felt heard, respected and able to influence their care. People said staff at all levels were approachable and took time to involve them in decisions, including choices about activities, meals and daily routines.

Staff used everyday interactions to gather feedback, and conversations observed during the inspection showed they checked people’s comfort, preferences and wellbeing throughout the day.

Residents’ meetings took place every other month and people described these as constructive, with changes made as a result. Minutes showed these included discussions around activities, menus and the home environment. Comments included, “It is worth going because wherever possible a request is granted” and “The meetings are a very useful way of exchanging views.”

Complaints were rare but handled thoroughly and professionally, with learning identified and shared with staff. Compliments and complaints were collated and analysed by the registered manager and shared with the nominated individual and the board of trustees to ensure themes and trends were identified. The provider also conducted satisfaction surveys to gather people’s feedback about the service and used these to drive improvements. The most recent survey showed people were extremely happy with the care they received.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed. People’s individual backgrounds, needs and characteristics were well understood and recorded. Staff adapted their approach depending on cultural, physical or emotional needs and ensured people had fair access to activities, healthcare and community engagement.

People had access to a wide range of activities and communal spaces. We saw people in lounges, the conservatory and garden, with staff facilitating engagement.

The environment supported accessibility. Corridors were clear of obstruction, floors were dementia‑friendly, and bedroom doors were personalised to help orientation. We saw people who choose to remain in their rooms or use communal areas, and staff supported different preferences.

The provider’s policies supported access to the service and its facilities. Visiting was unrestricted, and relatives spoke positively about feeling welcome. People and relatives confirmed that people were treated equally regardless of their differences.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Equality and diversity policies were in place and staff had received equality and diversity training to ensure people’s care, treatment and support promoted equality and protected their rights.

Staff showed an excellent understanding of inequalities and took action to reduce them. The registered manager told us how staff supported someone with Parkinson’s disease to overcome barriers associated with their condition. They told us, “The person’s ability to communicate is impaired. When they have appointments, they are accompanied, at their request, by staff who understand their communication needs so that they are supported to convey their point of view. We also worked with the person to identify how we could preserve skills as their condition progressed and the person's voice has become softer. They told us that they wanted their voice to be stronger, so we arranged for them to have a course of speech and language therapy. They reported an improvement in vocal strength and power following their therapy.”

People were also supported to overcome barriers and challenge decisions made about them. The registered manager also told us how they supported someone to challenge a mental health diagnosis, get an alternative diagnosis and access a different treatment plan. The registered manager said, “We noted aspects of the person’s presentation that supported an alternative diagnosis, and we worked with the family to arrange for a further assessment, where the diagnosis and treatment plan was then changed. Gradually, their symptoms began to resolve, so that they were able to begin a program of rehabilitation.” These examples showed a strong culture of compassion, non‑judgement and positive risk‑taking, which enabled people to thrive regardless of their circumstances or challenges.

Feedback from people and relatives showed they felt valued and understood. One person said, “This is a wonderful place, and I am truly grateful for being here.” A relative told us the service was “outstanding in all respects,” highlighting consistent kindness, respect and personalised support that led to positive outcomes. Overall, feedback from multiple sources suggested that people, experienced respectful care, improved wellbeing and outcomes that enhanced their quality of life.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Where appropriate, advanced care plans and Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were clearly documented and flagged in electronic care records.

People receiving end of life care were supported through coordinated planning with external professionals such as palliative care teams. External professionals told us people were often able to stay at Beechmore Court for the rest of their lives because staff adapted support as their needs changed, reducing avoidable moves. One professional said, “Beechmore Court offers long-term, continuous care that can transition into end-of-life care. When this happens, the service adapts to people’s changing needs with support from the palliative care team where necessary, so people spend their last days in their home if they want and have a good death wherever possible.”

Staff had completed end of life training, ensuring a consistent, compassionate and skilled approach to supporting people at the end of life. We saw feedback from relatives who were extremely grateful for the kind and compassionate end of life care their family member had received. Comments included, “Thank you so much for looking after my [family member]. You made her last years happy, funny and memorable” and “Thank you so much for the care you gave [family member] at the end of his life enabling him to have a such as peaceful ending.”