Archived: Beech House - Basildon

Updated 7 September 2019

The inspection: We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We planned this inspection to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team: This inspection was carried out by an inspector, a member of the inspectorate team and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type: Beech House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection: We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information registered providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We also sought feedback from partner agencies. We used this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with seven people, four relatives, and one visiting health professional. We also spoke with five staff, the registered manager, the deputy manager and the director, who was also the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the registered provider.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four care plans, and medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. We looked at audits and quality assurance procedures relating to the management of the service, which had been developed and implemented by the provider. Some of this information was received, following the inspection visit. When commissioners or visiting health professionals provided feedback, we included this within our report.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

After the inspection, we continued to seek clarification from the registered provider to corroborate evidence found.

Updated 7 September 2019

About the service: Beech House is a care home for up to twenty-eight older people, set in a residential area of Basildon, Essex.

People’s experience of using this service: Some people told us there were not always enough staff to meet people’s needs, and the registered manager needed to review the way staff were deployed around the service. In the quiet lounge there were long periods of time when staff were not present. Improvements were needed to the cleanliness of the service. The registered provider did not always assess, and manage risk in an effective way. A new system of dispensing medicines had been introduced. People received their medicines on time and in the correct way.

Some improvements were needed to the environment and décor of the service. Generally, consent had been obtained from people, but improvements were needed, to ensure people were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff treated people in a warm, caring, and friendly way, but some care was seen to be very focused on tasks. Activities on offer to people were routine and did not always focus on people's preferences and abilities.

Systems to monitor the quality of the service continued to be in place but had not ensured the quality of the care that people received remained consistent. When complaints had been made this information had not always been used to drive improvement. People and staff were positive about the new registered manager, who had been appointed since the last inspection.

Rating at last inspection: Good. The last report was published on 14 December 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. At the last inspection, this service was rated good. The service has deteriorated to requires improvement.

Enforcement: We found breaches of regulation around staffing, dignity and respect, and good governance. We will request an action plan from the registered provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will monitor the progress of the improvements and will return as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor this service to ensure people receive care which meets their needs.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.