• Care Home
  • Care home

Belford House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lymington Bottom, Four Marks, Alton, Hampshire, GU34 5AH (01962) 773588

Provided and run by:
Belford Care Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 5 March 2021

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 the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 23 February 2021 and was announced.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 5 March 2021

Belford House provides care without nursing for up to 32 older people who are frail or who live with dementia. At the time of the inspection 29 people were accommodated. It is arranged over two floors and has a lift.

Rating at last inspection

At our last inspection we rated the service good overall and requires improvement in the key area of safe, due to issues in relation to water safety and a lack of sufficient information regards when to give medicines people took as required. At this inspection we found these issues had been addressed for people.

The evidence gathered at this inspection continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People were kept safe from the risk of abuse. Staff understood their role and responsibility to keep people safe from the risk of harm. Risks to people had been identified, assessed and managed to ensure people’s safety. Learning took place following incidents to reduce the risk of repetition for people. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to provide people’s care in a timely manner. People received their medicines safely from trained staff. Processes were in place to identify any issues with people’s medicines and the registered manager took appropriate action where required. Processes were in place to protect people from the risk of acquiring an infection.

People’s needs were assessed, and the provision of their care was based on good practice guidance to ensure effective outcomes for them. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience required to provide people with effective care. Staff had received relevant training to enable them to support people appropriately at the end of their life. Staff supported people to eat a range of nutritious and appetising foods and drinks. Staff ensured people’s healthcare needs were met in a timely manner. The environment was spacious and suitable for the needs of the people accommodated.

Staff treated people with kindness, respect and compassion, people felt they mattered. People were asked for their views about their care and were encouraged to involve their relatives in decisions about their care if they wished. 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. Staff ensured people’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. People were provided with a range of opportunities for social stimulation, both within the service and in the local community.

There was a positive culture, that was person centred and focused on the achievement of good outcomes for people. There was a strong focus on continuous improvement. The service enabled and encouraged open communication with people who used the service, their relatives and staff. People’s concerns and complaints were listened to and used to improve their experience of the care provided. The service worked in close partnership with other agencies.

Further information is in the detailed findings below