Beaumont Manor is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and personal care as a single package under a contractual agreement with the local authority, health authority or the individual, if privately funded. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Beaumont Manor is registered to accommodate up to 82 people, including people who live with dementia or a dementia related condition, in one purpose built building in its own grounds. There are also flats on the same grounds however we were told these were not being used and currently the maximum people that could be accommodated in the main building was 71. The premises is set out on two main floors with each person using the service having their own individual bedroom and adequate communal facilities are available for people to make use of within the service. The building contains units for residential (ground floor) and nursing service users (first floor). At the time of our inspection there were 23 people using the service, 14 people receiving nursing care and 9 people receiving residential care. Beaumont Manor is a large detached property situated on the outskirts of Kirby le Soken, near Clacton on Sea.
This service has not yet been formally rated as it was registered in April 2017. At this inspection, which was the first for the service we found the service was 'Good'.
People and relatives told us the service was well-managed and provided a high standard of care. They said they had confidence in the registered manager who was approachable and helpful. They told us the care and nursing staff were kind, thoughtful and caring. There was an established staff team and staff turnover was low with some staff having worked at the service for a while. This meant staff had the opportunity to get to know the people they supported well.
All the staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the people at the service, their personalities, and what was important to them. People were encouraged to make choices about all aspects of their care and support including getting up and going to bed times, activities, personal care routines, and menu choices. Staff consulted with people and their relatives about how they wanted their care provided and ensured this was recorded in people's care plans.
Staff knew how to keep people safe. They managed risk well by providing good quality and consistent care. The service was well-staffed. During our inspection visit call bells were answered promptly and if people needed support they didn't have to wait for long.
People had their medicines on time. Staff met people's healthcare needs promptly and effectively and knew when to call in a doctor if they were concerned about a person's well-being. Staff were well-trained and had the skills and knowledge they needed to provide effective care. They understood the importance of obtaining people's consent before carrying out care tasks and how to make decisions in their best interests where necessary.
People said the food served was good quality and the menu varied giving them plenty of choice. During our inspection visit we spent time in the dining room with some people who were having their meals. There was a leisurely atmosphere. Staff asked people what they wanted and brought it to them promptly. A relative told us mealtimes were flexible as people preferred this.
People had the opportunity to take part in group and one-to-one activities. People and relatives also had the opportunity to comment on the service through completing surveys and attending meetings where activities, menus, and complaints were discussed and those present were asked for their views and suggestions.
During the course of our inspection visit we saw the registered manager continually interacting with people and checking the quality of their care. People told us they would feel confident in raising concerns and complaints, and we saw there were processes in place to ensure these were responded to appropriately. Feedback about leadership in the home was good, and we saw there was a robust approach to measuring, monitoring and improving quality in the service which took the views, opinions and diverse needs of people and staff into account.