We carried out a review of the data available to us about Beechwood 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 Beechwood, you can give feedback on this service.
Beechwood is a residential care home providing accommodation to up to 5 people requiring personal care. The service provides support to people with a learning disability, sensory impairments and/or autistic people across one residential property. At the time of our inspection, there were 5 people using the service.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support:
Staff supported people to live as independently as possible and have a level of autonomy over their lives. People were provided with a choice in their day-to-day decision-making and families were involved in people’s care. People's risks in relation to their care were managed and staff understood how to maintain and encourage people's independence. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. We were assured that the service were generally following good infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe. Healthcare professionals told us that staff worked well with them to achieve positive outcomes for people.
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 practice.
Right Care:
Relatives told us they felt people were supported by staff in a kind, caring and dignified way and we observed this to be the case. People's differences were respected by staff and they had undertaken relevant training to effectively support people. This included training for learning disabilities and autism awareness for permanently employed staff. Relatives told us that staff knew their loved ones’ needs and preferences well. People's right to privacy was respected and staff encouraged people to provide feedback about the care provided in a format they could understand. Care plans were personalised and included information on people's healthcare needs, communication needs, preferences and social history. Care plans included steps to take to ensure people had regular access to a dentist and were following good oral care guidelines. People were supported to enjoy the diet of their choice and staff encouraged them to have a nutritionally balanced diet. People had individual goals and objectives which were regularly reviewed by staff. The service was situated within a larger complex with access to a day centre and other similar services. People were able to access the local community and were supported by staff to do so.
Right Culture:
The culture of the service was open, inclusive and empowered people to live as independently as possible. Relatives were complimentary about the service and felt their ideas and concerns would be listened to by the registered manager and staff. Management had undertaken audits to look at ways of improving the service although these were not always effective in identifying issues. Where we highlighted shortfalls, the registered manager took immediate action and implemented processes to ensure this would not happen again. Staff were complimentary about the registered manager and told us they were able to raise concerns.
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 (published 26 April 2019).
Why we inspected
The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the culture in the service. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks. We did not find evidence of the concerns we received in relation to the culture in the 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.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
People’s experience of using this service:
Relatives told us they felt their loved ones were safe at Beechwood, and staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people from abuse. Risks to people were recorded and managed appropriately. There were a sufficient number of staff to meet people’s needs, and medicines were recorded correctly and administrated safely.
People’s rights were protected in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were up to date with training and received supervision on a regular basis. The design of the building was suitable for people’s needs. Staff felt that the communication within the service was effective, and people were referred to healthcare professionals where required.
Relatives told us staff were extremely kind and caring, and we observed friendly interactions between people and staff. People were involved in decisions around their care and were encouraged to be independent as much as possible. People’s dignity and privacy was respected, with personal care and conversations taking place behind closed doors.
There were a wide range of activities available which helped people live fulfilled lives. The service had not received any complaints, but there was a policy around this in place for people and relatives if required. Although people were young adults, the service had considered and recorded their end of life wishes.
Staff felt supported by various levels of management within the service. Robust quality checks allowed the service to identify and resolve any issues or improvements. People and staff were engaged in the running of the service and asked for feedback regularly. The service had strong working partnerships with a range of organisations, and had plans in place to improve the garden.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good (report published on 28 September 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned fully comprehensive inspection to confirm the service remained Good.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor all information received about the service to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.
Beechwood is a large bungalow. There were shared bathrooms, a communal kitchen and a communal lounge. There was an outside garden area. Access to the bungalow was step free and accessible for wheelchairs.
The service had a registered manager in post. 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.
People’s quality of life had improved under the leadership of the registered manager. Staff and relatives all described the management in exceptional terms. Staff talked positively about their jobs and their shared commitment to people achieving their best. The leadership at the home had led to great improvements in the past 14 months, care was based on best practice and the staff team highly motivated to achieve excellent care. The registered manager was proactive and determined, they ensured effective and close monitoring of all aspects of the service to ensure ongoing improvement across all areas.
On the day of the inspection staff within the service were relaxed, there was a calm and friendly atmosphere. Everybody had a clear role within the service. Information we requested was supplied promptly, records were organised, clear, easy to follow and comprehensive.
People had limited verbal communication but we observed they felt comfortable with staff, were warm, tactile and engaged in their interactions with staff. Care records were personalised and gave people control over all aspects of their lives. Staff responded quickly to people’s change in needs. People or where appropriate those who mattered to them, were involved in regularly reviewing their needs and how they would like to be supported. People’s preferences were identified and respected.
Staff put people at the heart of their work; they exhibited a kind and compassionate attitude towards people. Strong relationships had been developed and practice was person focused and not task led. Staff had appreciation of how to respect people’s individual needs around their privacy and dignity.
People’s risks were managed well and monitored. People were promoted to live full and active lives. Staff were highly motivated and creative in finding ways to overcome obstacles that restricted people’s independence.
People had their medicines managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed, received them on time and understood what they were for. People were supported to maintain good health through regular access to health and social care professionals, such as GPs, social workers, occupational therapists and physiotherapists.
People we observed were safe. The environment was uncluttered and clear for people to move freely around the home, equipment was well maintained and outings to external venues risk assessed. Staff discreetly monitored people’s behaviour and interactions to ensure the safety of all the people and staff at the service. All staff had undertaken training on safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, they displayed good knowledge on how to report any concerns and described what action they would take to protect people against harm. Staff told us they felt confident any incidents or allegations would be fully investigated.
People were supported by staff that confidently made use of their knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (2005), to make sure people were involved in decisions about their care and their human and legal rights were respected. Families were involved in decision making and advocacy services were used when required. The service followed the laws and processes in place which protect people’s human rights and liberty.
People were supported by staff teams that had received a comprehensive induction programme, tailored training and ongoing support that reflected individual’s needs.
People were protected by the service’s safe recruitment practices. Staff underwent the necessary checks which determined they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults, before they started their employment.
The service had a policy and procedure in place for dealing with any concerns or complaints.
No written complaints had been made to the service in the past twelve months.
There were robust quality assurance systems in place. Feedback from relatives and professionals was noted, listened to and action taken. Incidents were appropriately recorded and analysed from trends. Learning from incidents and concerns raised was used to help drive improvements and ensure positive progress was made in the delivery of care and support provided by the service.