All inspections: Belle Vue Country House

Dates of Assessment: 2 July to 9 July 2026. Belle Vue Country House is a care home, providing accommodation, nursing and personal care to people living with varying stages of dementia and mental health conditions. The service can accommodate up to 41 people, at the time of our assessment 29 people were living at the service.

At this assessment, we found sustained improvements across the service. The registered manager had achieved their registration with CQC since our last assessment and had worked with their team to address previous shortfalls. The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to the overall governance of the service, consent and how the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was applied. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

MCA assessments were now completed for people who lacked mental capacity and best interest decisions were made and documented in line with legislation. Staff offered choices to people and requested consent before supporting them but respected their wishes if they declined.

Leadership and governance arrangements had improved since the last assessment. The registered manager and management team had created an open and inclusive culture, with clear oversight of quality and safety. Auditing systems were more effective, and learning from incidents and feedback was used to drive continuous improvement.

Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people at risk of abuse and now had access to up to date policies should they need to escalate any concerns. Staff demonstrated an understanding of safeguarding processes and appropriate action was taken when concerns were identified. Medicines were now well organised and stored safely. Staff continued to administer medicines in a person-centred way.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and adapted their approach based on individual needs and preferences. Improvements had been made to people’s experiences, including more personalised bedrooms and enhanced activities that reflected people’s interests.

People’s needs were assessed before admission and regularly reviewed. Staff worked effectively with external professionals to achieve positive outcomes for people, including improvements in wound care, nutrition and overall wellbeing. People were supported to live healthier lives and maintain independence wherever possible.

The general environment had improved; works had been completed to upgrade bathrooms, toilets and people’s bedrooms which meant infection prevention and control processes could now be effectively practiced. Systems to ensure equipment was serviced within timeframes were in place and upgrades to the fire system had been completed. Works had been carried out to provide a more suitable environment for people living with dementia, including signage to support their independence when walking around the service.

Feedback was now regularly sought from people and their relatives; meetings were held to discuss changes within the service and seek ideas. Staff told us they felt valued, well supported and able to contribute to changes within the service.

The registered manager had built up a support network to keep themselves up to date with best practice guidance. They told us of plans they had to continually improve the service to promote good outcomes for people including expanding on activities and outings.

Dates of Assessment: 06 October to 21 October 2025. Belle Vue Country House is a care home, providing accommodation, nursing and personal care to people living with varying stages of dementia and mental health conditions. The service can accommodate up to 41 people, at the time of our inspection 34 people were living at the service.

The manager of the service was new to their role. They were highly regarded amongst people, their relatives, staff and professionals. However, there were some gaps in the manager’s knowledge in respect of legislation and regulation. For example, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were not always being followed. Quality assurance systems did not always ensure shortfalls were identified in people’s care records, the environment, equipment and infection prevention and control practices.

Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people at risk of abuse. However, policies were not current for staff to refer to and escalate different types of abuse. We identified some shortfalls in the safe storage of medicines, although staff administered safely and in line with people’s preferences.

There was a lack of activities and engagement for people, the provider was aware of this and an activity worker was being recruited to improve people’s social stimulation. Although staff treated people with compassion and dignity, there was room for improvement regarding staff’s understanding of people’s right to decline. Staff were seen to be kind and caring to people and people’s requests were mostly being promptly attended to.

Staff were not always deployed effectively which meant there was not always enough staff to support people at busy times of the day. Staff were recruited safely and regularly supervised; they were given training opportunities to support them in their roles.

Health and social care professional involvement was sought when needed, staff monitored people following treatment plans and provided feedback to professionals if required. People could access advice from visiting professionals and were supported to attend health appointments.

People and their relatives were not given opportunities to provide formal feedback; however, they were able to speak to managers when needed.

People, their relatives, professionals and staff spoke highly of the provider and manager and said they had an open door policy and was available to speak with if there were any concerns.

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.

At this inspection we identified 2 breaches of Regulation in relation to consent and the overall governance of the service.

About the service

Belle Vue Country House provides nursing care and accommodation for up to 41 people. On the day of our inspection there were 30 people living at the home. The home specialises in the care of people living with dementia and mental health conditions. The home is a country house spread over two floors with three communal lounges with dining areas and is set in large surrounding gardens.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks to people's safety had been assessed, and actions taken to mitigate them. People’s care plans detailed health needs but did not always reflect the personalised care which was being delivered. We have made a recommendation to the provider about further developing care plans to reflect the knowledge and practice in place. This is in the Well-Led section of this report.

People and their relatives were happy with the care they received and felt safe with the staff that were supporting them. People were safeguarded from situations in which they may experience harm. Staff knew how to identify potential harm and report concerns. People received their medicines safely from registered nurses. Checks were carried out prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to work with people who used the service.

The culture of the service was positive, and people, relatives and staff were complementary of the management and provider. Improvements had been made to systems and process that monitored the quality of the service being delivered and accuracy of records. Care was personalised to meet people's individual needs and preferences. Staff knew people well and provided support in line with people's preferences. People's diverse needs were catered for and they were treated with dignity and respect. People and relatives described the staff as caring and thoughtful and said they were treated with care and kindness. Feedback about the service from people and those close to them was positive.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this. For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good. Report published (22 September 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Belle Vue country house on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Recommendations

We have made a recommendation about the recording of information.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

The inspection took place on the 30 August 2017 and was unannounced.

Belle Vue Country House provides nursing care and accommodation for up to 41 people. On the day of our inspection there were 31 people living at the home. The home specialises in the care of people living with dementia and mental health conditions. The home is a country house spread over two floors with three communal lounges with dining areas and is set in large surrounding gardens.

At the last inspection on 18 August 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People and relatives told us they felt the service was safe. One person told us “I feel safe because everyone is nice to me”. People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

The provider had arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.

Staff considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. 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. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People and their relatives felt staff were skilled to meet the needs of people and provide effective care. One relative told us “Staff are well trained even the receptionist is involved. They really know how to communicate and handle residents”.

People’s individual needs continued to be assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.

Staff felt fully supported by the registered manager to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. Staff spoke positively about training and supervisions they received and commented on how they found they could ask questions freely. One member of staff told us “I have recently had updated training in end of life care and diabetes, which I found useful”.

Staff continued to support people to eat and drink and they were given time to eat at their own pace. People’s nutritional needs were met and people reported that they had a good choice of food and drink. One person told us “The food is yummy. Look at this lovely lamb we have today with vegetables. It really is lovely”.

People and relatives found staff to be kind and caring and the care they received was good. Comments included “Staff are good and caring” and “The staff care about me and are nice and kind”.

People, staff and relatives found the registered manager approachable and professional. One person told us “The manager is a good leader, he comes in early and sometimes brings me my breakfast and eats with me”. A member of staff told us “The manager is good, he spends a lot of time with staff and residents”.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The inspection took place on the 18 August 2015 and was unannounced.

Belle Vue Country House provides nursing care and accommodation for up to 41 people. On the day of our inspection there were 31people living at the home. The home specialises in the care of people living with dementia and mental health conditions. The home is a country house spread over two floors with three communal lounges with dining areas and set in large gardens.

The home had a registered manager. 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.

The experiences of people were positive. People told us they felt safe living at the service, staff were kind and compassionate and the care they received was good. One person told us “This place is secure. I have no concerns, this place is fine. I feel safe here, staff are very good.” We observed people at lunchtime and through the day and found people to be in a positive mood with warm and supportive staff interactions.

There were good systems and processes in place to keep people safe. Assessments of risk had been undertaken and there were clear instructions for staff on what action to take in order to mitigate the risks. Staff knew how to recognise the potential signs of abuse and what action to take to keep people safe. The registered manager made sure there was enough staff on duty at all times to meet people’s individual care needs. When new staff were employed at the home the registered manager followed safe recruitment practices.

Staff supported people to eat and they were given time to eat at their own pace. The home met people’s nutritional needs and people reported that they had a good choice of food and drink. Staff were patient and polite, supported people to maintain their dignity and were respectful of their right to privacy. People had access to and could choose suitable leisure and social activities in line with their individual interests and hobbies. These included trips to local attractions, singing, painting and arts and crafts. One person told us “I get involved in the activities at the home. I like my newspaper and playing scrabble. 4 or 5 of us go out for a half hour walk regularly with the activities person. Sometime 8 of us go out in a mini bus to Brighton”.

People’s individual needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support they required. People were consulted about their care to ensure wishes and preferences were met. Staff worked with other healthcare professionals to obtain specialist advice about people’s care and treatment.

The home considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. Staff observed the key principles in their day to day work checking with people that they were happy for them to undertake care tasks before they proceeded.

The provider had arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get the medicine they needed when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services when needed. People had sufficient to eat and drink throughout the day.

Staff felt fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. For example staff were offered to undertake additional training and development courses to increase their understanding of the needs of people. One staff member told us “I have worked here for many years and we are a really good team, training is good and we really get to know people and care for them in a way they suits them”.

Resident and staff meetings regularly took place which provided an opportunity for staff and people to feedback on the quality of the service. Feedback was sought by the registered manager via surveys. Surveys results were positive and any issues identified acted upon. People and relatives we spoke with were aware how to make a complaint and all felt they would have no problem raising any issues. The registered manager responded to complaints in a timely manner with details of any action taken.

There was a positive and open atmosphere at the home. People, staff and relatives found the registered manager approachable and professional. One person told us “The manager, she is nice always happy to have a chat and see how I am doing”. The registered manager carried out regular audits in order to monitor the quality of the home and plan improvements.

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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an unannounced inspection.

Belle Vue Country House is a registered care home that provides nursing care and accommodation for up to 41 people. The home specialises in the care of people in the moderate or advanced stages of dementia and some people were unable to communicate verbally. Others had mental health conditions, for example, bi-polar disorder, manic depression or schizophrenia. At the time of our visit, there were 31 people living at the home. There was a registered manager present. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.

People said they felt safe. One person referred to the staff and said, “They are all kind and caring and you have no reason to feel unsafe”. Staff were appropriately trained and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and safeguarding. Comprehensive risk assessments undertaken for people ensured that staff were able to meet their needs in a personalised way. There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to ensure that people’s needs were addressed in a timely fashion. People’s human rights were properly recognised, respected and promoted. Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately, including the administration of controlled drugs. The premises were suitably designed and equipped to ensure that people were able to move around independently or with support. The home was clean, free from infection and well ventilated.

The home effectively met people’s health and care needs because staff communicated well with people, passed information about changes to their health or wellbeing across the team and sought advice and treatment from health care professionals as appropriate. Care records were detailed and reviewed on a regular basis. People were well nourished and their food and nutrition levels were monitored on a daily basis. Staff received essential training and additional training in areas such as end of life care, mental health and first aid. Staff meetings were held every two months and staff had one to one supervisions every month. People had their own furniture and rooms were personalised in line with their preferences.

People’s personal preferences, likes and dislikes were recorded on file and staff treated everyone, including relatives, with kindness and compassion. A relative told us, “The staff looked after me. They kept me informed [about their family member] and helped me to get through a really difficult time”. Staff knew people well and were keyworkers for named people, co-ordinating all aspects of their care and liaising with relatives and professionals. Where people were unable to make important decisions regarding their care, then advocates or named representatives were engaged. People’s cultural and religious beliefs were catered for and they were treated with respect and dignity. End of life care was given in line with people’s and relatives’ wishes, in a compassionate and caring manner, by appropriately trained and caring staff.

Occasional social events were organised such as a summer fete and Christmas party. Access to local towns was limited, unless relatives took people out or taxis were arranged. Some people were able to access the local community independently. There was little in the way of physical stimulus for people with advanced dementia and some of the daily activities that were organised were beyond the understanding of some. Staff were encouraged to spend time with people and support them to be as independent as possible, to make decisions and choices. People received care that was responsive to their needs. The manager undertook comprehensive pre-admission assessments with people and their relatives that enabled staff to start to get to know people before they came to Belle Vue Country House. Care and support was planned appropriately in advance of admission. Complaints were acknowledged, investigated and responded to in a timely manner.

People were involved in all aspects of their care and in developing the service. Accidents and incidents were reported and recorded appropriately and plans put in place to prevent or minimise the risk of re-occurrence. Residents and relatives spoke highly of staff. One said, “Nothing but delighted. Made me feel so welcome. Always keen to have a chat, never seem rushed to do things”. Staff had regular one to one supervisions and contributed to team meetings. There was an ‘open door’ policy at the home and the manager was readily accessible, as were nurses and other staff. A culture had been developed that encouraged the sharing of information and knowledge across the organisation. The registered manager played an active part in all aspects of the home. There were robust procedures in place to investigate complaints and concerns, as well as a whistleblowing policy.

During our visit we met and spoke with seven people living at the home. As the home looked after people with dementia, we found that some of the people that we spoke with were unable to provide us with meaningful verbal accounts of their experiences in the home. Therefore we gathered evidence by spending time watching how people spent their time, the support they got from staff and whether or not they had positive experiences.

We saw that staff addressed people by their preferred names. Personal care was carried out in private and staff were discreet when asking about care needs. We saw that people felt comfortable in approaching staff and asking for assistance.

Everyone that we spoke with told us that they were happy living at the home and that they felt that their care needs were being met. One person said, 'I have always enjoyed it here. The staff are very good, and you never get bored. There is always someone to help you'.

We found that people had planned care that met with their needs. We also found that people's consent had been obtained prior to treatment where appropriate.

We found that the home had followed safe recruitment processes, and had systems in place to ensure that people living at the home received a safe and good quality service.

People we spoke with told us that the home was clean. One person said, 'It's always clean, I often wonder if someone comes really early in the morning and cleans as it's always so nice'. We found that the home was clean and that staff took infection control seriously.

People living at the home told us they felt safe living there and that staff were available when they needed them. They liked the staff and felt that they knew them well.

People we spoke with told us they were able to choose the way they spent their day. They felt the staff respected their privacy and dignity. Staff knew the people living at the home well and had a good understanding of their needs.

Comments from people living at the home included 'it's very nice', 'I like it here' and 'they (staff) are a nice bunch of people'.

People told us that liked living at Belle Vue Country House.

These older reports are from our old approaches to inspection, including those from before CQC was created.

Belle Vue Country House

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

During an assessment under our new approach

22 April 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

30 August 2017

During a routine inspection

18 August 2015

During a routine inspection

29 and 31 July 2014

During a routine inspection

24 September 2013

During a routine inspection

28 August 2012

During a routine inspection

Reports under our old system of regulation