Beechwood Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective becausethey did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs with them in a timely way.

Care plans were developed based on assessed needs, and action was taken to ensure people had access to the care and support they required.People’s needs were reviewed regularly. However, reviews were not always completed in response to changes in need. This limited the ability to fully evidence how care was adapted in line with people’s changing circumstances.

The provider planned and delivered care and treatment in partnership with people, focusing on what mattered most to them. Care was provided in line with legislation, evidence-based practice, and recognised standards.

People spoke positively about the support they received, and appropriate referrals were made to external services when needed. People at risk of weight loss were supported to increase their calorie intake, with food and drink offered regularly throughout the day. One relative told us, “[Family member] has put two stone on here! They are eating very well and really like the food. It is outstanding, there is always fresh fruit, cakes, all sorts on offer.”

Technology and adapted equipment were used to support care delivery, including around falls risk.

We discussed best practice for people living with dementia, and the registered manager planned to incorporate this into the ongoing programme of redecoration and improvement.

The provider worked effectively across teams and services to support people and ensure continuity of care. They shared assessments when people moved between services, helping to ensure individuals only needed to tell their story once.

Staff reported strong teamwork and a supportive working environment. One staff member said, “We run as a team, and all help each other. There is good training, and we all know what we are doing. We all get spoken to and treated the same.”

Staff worked collaboratively with external professionals to meet people’s needs. They sought advice and support when required. One professional commented, “I have found Beechwood Lodge to be active in trying to preserve residents’ placements.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing, promoting independence, choice, and control. Staff encouraged people to live healthier lives and, where possible, reduce their future need for care and support.

People and families expressed confidence in staff’s ability to recognise when someone was becoming unwell. One relative told us, “I could get emotional, but they have been fantastic from day one. [Family member] has been in a bad way, but they have saved their life twice. They spotted an infection so early when they first came here, enabling it to be dealt with quickly and saving them.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to support continuous improvement and ensure positive, consistent outcomes. They worked to ensure that care met both clinical standards and the individual expectations of people using the service.

There was a consistent staff team who knew people well and understood their needs.

However, records did not always contain sufficient detail to demonstrate the level of care being provided, for example, in relation to diet, fluid intake, or repositioning although we found no evidence that people had come to harm as a result of shortfalls in the record keeping.

The provider informed people of their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff generally sought consent before providing support. Where people lacked capacity, there was a process in place for assessing this and making decisions in the person’s best interests. Where these decisions involved restrictions, the provider ensured they were legally authorised.

However, further work was needed to ensure written records of consent were consistently maintained or completed.