Beacon Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that staff protected people from avoidable harm and made sure care was delivered from environments that were clean and well maintained. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The service had contracts to ensure the premises was maintained. Health and safety and fire risk assessments had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed. Fire equipment checks were documented. Electrical equipment was tested to ensure it was safe to use, and the equipment was calibrated for accuracy.

The service had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles. Leaders ensured staff were up-to-date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence. Competency checks were documented. The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references, a criminal records check and information on physical and mental health that were relevant to their roles.

Staff had regular one-to-one meetings and half-yearly appraisals with their manager to discuss any concerns, their performance and learning needs. These were all documented. Leaders identified and addressed poor performance concerns where required. Staff were upskilled to support the service and their professional development. For example, the service supported a healthcare assistant in pursuing training as a nursing associate and their office manager to study an apprenticeship in management.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

During our onsite visit, the service's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. The service’s infection prevention and control (IPC) lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and took actions where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. Staff had completed relevant training in IPC in line with their roles and responsibilities.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) was available to staff and there were hand-washing facilities in all clinical areas. Sharps waste bins used for disposing of used medical instruments such as needles or syringes were safely managed. Clinical waste bins were locked in a secure area to avoid unauthorised use or removal.

The service used fabric chairs in some clinical rooms, which were included in the existing cleaning schedule. Leaders had considered the associated IPC risks, completed a risk assessment, and had a plan in place to replace them with wipeable chairs.

The service met with the external cleaning company regularly to discuss any identified issues and reviewed the cleaning audits. The service had cleaning schedules which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. However, during our onsite visit, cleaning records were not consistently documented. In addition, the 2 cleaning cupboards were cluttered, with mop buckets from different cleaning zones stacked together, increasing the risk of cross-contamination.

Following the onsite visit, the service took immediate action by discussing and reviewing these concerns with the cleaning company. The service provided evidence that the cleaning cupboards were reorganised. Cleaners received additional training, and the cleaning documentation was moved to a more accessible location to help ensure cleaning records were completed consistently.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.