We carried out a review of the data available to us about Beechcroft Manor Nursing Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Beechcroft Manor Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
At our last inspection in August 2015 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. 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.
There was not a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. Since the previous registered manager had left a new manager had been employed and was working at the home . 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 (HSCA) and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The provider had learned lessons from other care service who had locations which failed to comply with the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014.HSCA.
People told us they felt safe and said they were supported to have choice and control in their lives.
Staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
There were sufficient staff available to ensure people's wellbeing, safety and security was protected.
An appropriate recruitment and selection process was in place which ensured new staff had the right skills and were suitable to work with people.
Staff had a good understanding of systems in place to manage medicines and safeguarding matters.
The service was working within the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People we spoke with said they were involved in care planning and were confident that their comments and concerns would be acted upon.
The provider took account of any complaints and comments to improve the service.
Risk assessments were in place for a number of areas and were regularly updated.
Staff had good knowledge and understanding of people's health conditions.
Feedback received from people and their relatives was positive and people were encouraged to contribute their views.
People were positive about the staff who supported them and told us they liked the staff and were treated with dignity and kindness.
People were satisfied with the support they received in relation to nutrition and hydration.
There was an open and transparent culture and encouragement for people to provide feedback.
Staff told us they enjoyed working for the organisation and spoke positively about the culture and management of the service. They also told us that they were encouraged to openly discuss any issues.
This inspection took place on 13 August 2015 and was unannounced.
Beechcroft Manor Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation, personal care and nursing services for up to 18 older people and people who are living with a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people living at the home. People were accommodated in single rooms, some with en suite facilities. There was a shared lounge, dining room and an enclosed garden.
There was a registered manager in place. 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.
There were appropriate processes and risk assessments in place to protect people from risks to their safety and wellbeing, including the risks of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to recognise and report signs of abuse. Arrangements were in place to keep people safe and comfortable in the event of an emergency evacuation.
The registered manager made sure there were enough staff with the right skills and knowledge to support people safely. Staff stored and administered medicines, including skin creams and ointments, safely. Medicines records, including for medicines prescribed “as required” were accurate and complete.
Staff were supported to obtain and keep up to date the skills and knowledge they required to support people. They were aware of the need to obtain people’s consent and were guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions. Where people lacked capacity and were at risk of being deprived of their liberty in order to keep them safe, the registered manager had applied for authorisation under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
The service provided varied, nutritious meals which were prepared and served according to people’s individual needs. People had access to their GP and other healthcare providers when needed.
Staff had established caring relationships with people. They knew about their life history and interests, and spent time chatting with them when they were not actively supporting people. Staff supported people to take part in decisions about their care and support, and people were listened to. Staff respected people’s individuality, privacy and independence.
People received care and treatment that met their needs and took into account their wishes and preferences. Staff delivered care and treatment in line with plans and assessments that included the management and treatment of longer term medical conditions. The service had a procedure in place to manage complaints, but people had not felt the need to use it.
Staff supported people in a variety of individual and group activities, including trips outside the home. Staff encouraged and supported people to take part in activities so they did not feel excluded.
People, their families and staff were all complimentary about the atmosphere and culture in the home. People expressed affection for the home and its staff. Staff expressed pride in the service provided, and described it as homely and well run.
The registered manager had an effective and organised management system, and had introduced imaginative methods to maintain the quality of the service and to communicate their priorities and values.
There was a thorough and wide ranging system of checks and audits to monitor and assess the quality of service. Actions arising from these checks were followed up.
We saw that people had their privacy and dignity maintained whilst being supported with care. Care needs had been assessed with a personalised care plan devised with guidance for staff on how to support people.
The home was clean and well maintained. People had personalised their rooms with their own possessions including their own furniture. There were risk assessments for all equipment used to support people.
We carried out an inspection in January 2103 when we identified concerns with care planning and medicines. . We made compliance actions asking the provider to take action in order that we were reassured that people were in receipt of safe and adequate care. The provider wrote to us and told us what action they were going to take.
We carried out an inspection on 23 April 2013 to review the progress the provider had made in taking action to be compliant in the areas where we had previously assessed them as non compliant.
Staff we spoke with explained how the care and medicine administration were monitored and how issues and concerns were
People we spoke with said that the staff 'Are nice and helpful'. At lunchtime the majority of people stayed in their room to have their lunch. The manager told us that most people chose to stay in their rooms unless there was an activity or function and was not because the lift was being repaired on the day of our visit. Staff told us that it depends how people are feeling as to whether they come down to the communal areas and that the needs of people can change daily.
Comments from staff included 'We have handovers each time the shift changes which is helpful when I only work part time'. Staff we met on the day told us about the training they had attended recently and that they were able to speak openly with the manager about any concerns.
We also observed the way staff interacted with people who live at the home.
People who live at the home reported that they could express views about the care they received and that their privacy and dignity was respected. Those we spoke with said they were happy with the care that they received and the way it was provided. We were told that the people liked the food provided and people confirmed that they had a choice of meals.
Those we spoke with told us that they received all the medical support that they needed and that they received suitable support to take their medicine.
They reported that they felt safe in the home and that it was kept clean. We observed the home to be clean and that proper measures were taken to avoid infections being spread.
People who live at the home told us that they considered there was always enough staff on duty to support them with their daily needs. They also said that staff were friendly and helpful.
People told us that if they were unhappy about anything they would report it to the manager and they felt confident that she would deal with it.