You are here

Archived: The Beeches Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 11 April 2019

About the service: The Beeches is a residential care home providing personal care and accommodation for up to 23 people. At the time of the inspection there were 17 people living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

Since the last inspection the registered manager had failed to assess and monitor staff training, to equip staff with essential skills and knowledge. They had not considered that training was out of date and not assessed whether the training staff had received was effective. This had a potential impact on people’s safety, for example, around infection control and medicines management.

Staff were not supported through the home’s formal supervision process and those supervisions that had taken place were not always effective. Improved quality monitoring and record keeping would have highlighted the above improvements.

Despite the above improvements required, there was no doubt that people were very happy living at The Beeches. They spoke fondly of the provider, registered manager and all staff. Likewise, although staff wanted to be better supported by the registered manager, they enjoyed caring for ‘their residents’ and felt proud when they went home.

Satisfaction and views around feeling safe were positive. One person told us, “We all feel very safe, it’s one of the main reasons we decide to live in a care home. Staff are kind and support us 24 hours a day, we have good food, we are warm and safe and have a nice home to live in”.

Staff understood their responsibility to keep people safe from harm. People were supported to take risks and promote their independence. Risks were assessed, and plans put in place to keep people safe. There was enough staff to safely provide care and support. Checks were carried out on staff before they started work to assess their suitability to support people in a care setting.

Arrangements were made for people to see a GP and other healthcare professionals when they needed to do so. 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 were provided a healthy, nutritious, balanced diet whilst promoting and respecting choice and they confirmed this when we spoke with them.

Everyone we spoke with agreed that staff were caring and kind. Comments included, “Oh they are a super bunch”, “I like them all. I feel they genuinely care about us and enjoy their job”, “I have no concerns they are very respectful and always have a smile on their faces”.

Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. They were knowledgeable about people's lives before they started using the service. The service was responsive to people’s health and social needs. People received person-centred care and support. Regular monitoring and reviews meant that referrals had been made to appropriate health and social care professionals. Where necessary care and support had been changed to accurately reflect people's needs and improve their health and wellbeing.

People were encouraged and supported to make their views known and the service responded by making changes. Although improvements had been identified the provider and registered manager had good intentions and people and staff said positive things about them. The registered manager was genuinely disappointed that training and supervision had lapsed, and they had missed this. They agreed that quality assurance needed to improve to ensure the quality of service people received was monitored on a regular basis and, where shortfalls were identified they were acted upon.

We identified three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Details of action we have asked the provider to take can be found at the end of this report.

Rating at last inspection: Good (published September 2016)

Why we inspec

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 11 April 2019

The service was not always safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 11 April 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 11 April 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 11 April 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 11 April 2019

The service was not always well led.

Details are in our Safe findings below.