23 September 2016
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 was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 18 August 2016 and was unannounced.
The inspection team consisted of three inspectors, two of whom were pharmacy specialists, an expert by experience and a specialist practice advisor. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. A specialist advisor is a person who has up to date knowledge of research and good practice within this type of care service.
Before we visited Beaumond House, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider returned the PIR and we took this into account when we made our judgements in this report.
We also looked at the results of questionnaires we sent to people who use the service and community based healthcare professionals, information that had been sent to us by other agencies such as service commissioners and information we held about the home such as notifications. These are events that happened in the service that the provider is required to tell us about.
During the inspection we spent time observing how staff provided care for people to help us better understand their experiences of care. We spoke with seven people who used the short term respite service and domiciliary services. We looked at four people’s care records which included medicines administration charts.
We spoke with four health care assistants, a registered nurse and both registered managers. We also spoke with the cook, the human resources manager and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for the provider organisation. We looked at four staff personnel files, supervision and appraisal arrangements and staff duty rotas. We also looked at records and arrangements for managing complaints and monitoring and assessing the quality of the service provided within the home.
23 September 2016
We inspected Beaumond House on 18 August 2016. The inspection was unannounced.
Beaumond House is a community hospice managed by the registered charity Beaumond House Community Hospice. It is a nurse-led service with medical support provided by people’s own doctors. It is situated in the town of Newark in Nottinghamshire. They provide palliative care to people who live in Newark and surrounding areas with life limiting or terminal illnesses. The services provided included accommodation within four short term respite beds, care in people’s own homes and a day therapy service.
A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. Two registered managers were in post at the time of the inspection who shared the role equally.
Staff had ensured that people’s rights were respected by helping them to make decisions for themselves. The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor how registered persons apply the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and to report on what we find. These safeguards protect people when they are not able to make decisions for themselves and it is necessary to deprive them of their liberty in order to keep them safe. No one staying in the hospice had any restrictions of their liberty and the registered persons knew how to seek out any DoLS authorisations that may be required in the future.
People felt safe when they received care from staff, whether they were staying in the hospice or receiving care in their own home. Risks to their health, safety and welfare were minimised and staff knew how to respond to any concerns that might arise so that people were kept safe from abuse. There were enough staff on duty and background checks had been completed before new staff were appointed.
People had been supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their well-being and they had received all of the healthcare assistance they needed.
People had been consulted about the care they wanted to receive and they had been given all of the care and support they needed. People were supported to maintain their interests and were offered a range of meaningful activities to choose from when they visited the hospice. They knew how to raise concerns or make a complaint if they needed to and there was a system in place for resolving complaints.
People were treated with care, kindness and compassion. Staff recognised and upheld people’s right to privacy, promoted their dignity and respected confidential information.
Staff had received training and support which was designed to meet people’s individual needs. They knew how to care for people in the right way. They were supported to maintain and develop their knowledge and skills and were supported to speak out if they had any concerns about poor practice.
The registered persons promoted an inclusive approach to managing the services with an emphasis on continuous development. Quality checks had been completed to ensure that people received the care and services they needed.