Beech Lodge Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

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 had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider demonstrated a positive and supportive culture, with a clear focus on teamwork and collaboration. Staff spoke positively about the working environment and described a team-focused approach, which contributed to consistency in care and a shared understanding of expectations.

Staff reported feeling valued and supported in their roles, which helped to promote a stable and motivated workforce. This positive culture supported staff to work effectively together in meeting the needs of people.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The provider demonstrated effective leadership, with leaders who were visible within the service and knowledgeable about people’s needs. Staff spoke positively about leaders’ approachability and described a supportive environment, which contributed to a positive working culture.

There was strong clinical oversight in place, supporting safe and effective care delivery. Leaders maintained awareness of clinical risks and provided guidance to staff, helping to ensure that people received appropriate and well-managed care.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The provider promoted an open and transparent culture, where staff felt able to raise concerns. Staff spoken with confirmed they were confident to speak up and escalate issues when needed, which supported the identification and management of risks.

This approach helped to create an environment where staff were encouraged to share concerns and contribute to maintaining safe and effective care for people.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion within its workforce. There was strong support for an international staff team, helping to create a diverse and inclusive working environment. Staff were supported in their roles, which contributed to workforce stability and a positive team culture.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The service demonstrated established governance and management systems to support safe and effective care. There were audit processes in place, alongside high levels of training compliance, which supported staff to carry out their roles effectively. Clinical governance meetings were held regularly, where key areas such as falls, nutrition, infections were reviewed. In addition, the registered manager maintained oversight through daily monitoring of incidents and behaviours, including the use of ABC charts, and audits of call bell response times.

However, governance systems were not always fully effective in identifying and resolving all areas of risk. Medicines management concerns showed that existing oversight had not consistently identified or addressed these issues.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The provider demonstrated strong engagement with the local community and maintained positive relationships with people’s families. Families were encouraged to be involved in the service, which supported a sense of openness and helped to maintain important connections for people. In addition, when people passed away the care provided extended to their family members in their time of grief. A family member told us, “[Name] passed away a year ago, but I still call in to see the carers. If they haven’t seen me for a while they will phone me and check that I am okay.”

There were meaningful opportunities for social engagement, including a dementia café and social events for families and former relatives. These initiatives helped to promote inclusion, reduce social isolation and create a supportive community around the service.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The provider demonstrated a positive culture of learning and improvement, with a clear focus on enhancing outcomes for people. There was evidence of targeted initiatives, including wellbeing approaches and a structured falls reduction programme, which contributed to ongoing service development. The provider was also actively supporting improvement through the involvement of specialist roles, working with the service to develop and embed best practice guidance.

There was clear evidence of impact, with falls reduced by 62% through targeted interventions such as workshops, monitoring and the use of established falls pathways. Post-incident actions, including the introduction of hip protectors and increased observations, showed that learning was effectively translated into practice and used to improve care for people.