You are here

Becket House Nursing Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

About the service:

Becket House Nursing Home provides nursing and residential care for up to 23 older people, some of who may be living with dementia. At the time of our visit there were 20 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found:

There were insufficient numbers of staff to fully meet people's needs. Improvements were needed to ensure people were supported to engage in meaningful activities and were provided with sufficient stimulation to meet their needs and wishes.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. Although these were completed regularly there was no evidence of the actions taken when improvements were required.

Some improvements were required to the environment. We found that many people’s rooms were very cluttered with large boxes of incontinent pads and we saw a staff members bicycle parked in a persons en-suite shower room.

People’s communication needs, although identified had not been fully met, for example, there was a lack of information in different formats to meet their communication needs.

People received safe care and were protected against avoidable harm, neglect and discrimination. However, one person raised concerns about another person wandering into their room when we asked them if they felt safe. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and strategies were put in place to reduce the risks. Staff were appropriately recruited to ensure people were suitable to work at the service.

Peoples medicines were safely managed, and systems were in place to control and prevent the spread of infection.

People’s basic needs were assessed before they received a care package. Staff received an induction and ongoing training that enabled them to have the skills and knowledge to provide effective care.

People were supported to maintain good nutrition and hydration. However, people were not aware of what was on the menu until their meal was provided. One person told us “You get one choice. We only know what we are having when we get it.” Staff supported people to live healthier lives and access healthcare services when required.

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.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

Care plans supported staff to provide personalised care. There was a complaints procedure in place and systems in place to deal with complaints effectively. The service provided appropriate end of life care to people.

The service worked in partnership with outside agencies. The registered manager ensured there were systems in place to ensure compliance with duty of candour. The duty of candour is a set of specific legal requirements that providers of services must follow when things go wrong with care and treatment.

The last rating for this service was Good: The last report was published on 20 January 2017.

Following this inspection, the service met the characteristics for a rating of Requires improvement" in four key questions when we inspected. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was ‘Requires improvement’.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement:

We identified a breach of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to Staffing. Details of the action we have asked the provider to take can be found at the end of this report. We have made a recommendation about Good Governance and The Accessible S

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below