Archived: Beaumont Court

Updated 24 February 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 26 and 27 January 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Prior to our inspection the provider submitted a Provider Information Return (PIR). A PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed all of the information contained within the PIR and also statutory notifications the provider had submitted since our last visit. We also obtained feedback about the service from Northumberland contracts and commissioning team and safeguarding adults team. Statutory notifications are submitted to the Commission by registered persons in line with their obligations under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. They are reports of deaths and other incidents that have occurred within the service. We used the information that we gathered and reviewed to inform the planning of this inspection.

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, three members of the care staff team, three people who used the service and three people's relatives. We carried out observations around the premises and reviewed records related to health and safety matters, medicines management, governance and quality assurance. We also reviewed three people's care records to establish if they were appropriate and well maintained, and we looked at two staff files to review recruitment processes, staff training and the level of support staff received to fulfil their roles.

Updated 24 February 2017

Beaumont Court is a residential care home based in Prudhoe, Northumberland which provides accommodation and personal care and support, for up to eight people with learning and/or physical disabilities. There were seven people in receipt of care from the service at the time of our visit.

This inspection took place on the 26 and 27 January 2017 and was unannounced.

The last inspection we carried out at this service was in October 2015 at which the provider was found to be in breach of three of the regulations namely safeguarding people from abuse and improper treatment, staffing and good governance. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider had complied with the legal requirements of all three of the aforementioned regulations.

A registered manager was in post at the time of our inspection who had been registered with the Commission to manage the carrying on of the regulated activity since August 2016. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who were able to talk with us told us they felt safe living at the service. Relatives confirmed they had no concerns about their family member's care or how they were treated by staff. Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place for staff to follow and records showed that historic safeguarding cases had been dealt with appropriately.

Staffing levels had improved since our last inspection and permanent members of staff had been recruited. Staff and relatives told us this had led to more consistent care being delivered. Staff support had improved also in that staff were appropriately inducted, supervised and appraised. The training that staff needed to fulfil their roles had been reviewed and staff training had been brought up to date in key areas. Training In other topics relevant to the needs of the individual people whom the staff team supported, was planned to be completed in the near future.

Recruitment procedures remained robust, as they had been at our last inspection visit. Medicines continued to be managed safely and any medicines related issues were picked up promptly and addressed through the provider's quality assurance systems.

Risks that people were exposed to in their daily lives were assessed and regularly reviewed to protect people's safety. Environmental risks were well managed and emergency planning had been considered. Accidents and incidents were responded to appropriately. Analysis of accidents and incidents took place so that measures could be put in place to prevent repeat events.

People's needs were met and staff displayed a good overarching knowledge of how to support people, their behaviours, likes and dislikes. People and staff enjoyed good relationships and there was a calm happy atmosphere within the home. Medical attention from external healthcare professionals was sought in a timely manner whenever necessary.

Staff maintained people's privacy and dignity and encouraged them to be as independent as possible. People had choices about how they lived their lives and they were all active within the local community, for example, by attending day centres and going horse riding regularly.

CQC monitors the application of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and deprivation of liberty safeguards. The Mental Capacity Act (MCA) was appropriately applied and the provider had submitted applications to the local authority to deprive people of their liberty lawfully, to prevent them from coming to any harm where they lacked capacity. The service understood their legal responsibility under this act and they assessed people’s capacity when their care commenced and on an on-going basis when necessary. Decisions that needed to be made in people’s best interests had been undertaken and related records were available for us to view.

Care records were well maintained and regularly reviewed to ensure they remained up to date. Monitoring tools were used to ensure continuity of care. Handovers between shifts took place and a diary system was used to pass messages between changing staff teams.

The registered manager was organised and focused. Staff spoke highly of the input she had had into the service and the way in which she had driven improvements. The provider's oversight of the service had improved and quality assurance systems were effectively applied. The provider's compliance team monitored the service well and this meant that any shortfalls which were identified were promptly addressed. Staff and the registered manager were accountable for their actions.