CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by Beechfields Nursing Home
Beechfields Nursing Home Limited
1 Wissage Road, Lichfield, WS13 6EJ
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2024
Beechfields Nursing Home Limited is rated Inadequate and is in special measures; inspectors found serious safety, dignity and management failures.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 18 January 2024 and reviewed Safe and Well-led. They widened the inspection to include Caring after finding concerns about people's dignity. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals, and checked care records, medicines records and management documents.
Inspectors found people were at risk of harm. Safeguarding concerns were not always referred or investigated. Risk assessments were missing, medicines were not always managed safely, some environmental risks were not controlled, and staff did not have all the training needed for people's health conditions.
People were not always treated with dignity. Inspectors saw delayed personal care and a person eating without cutlery. However, people and relatives also described staff as kind, and people said they felt safe, involved in decisions and supported to make choices.
The overall rating fell from Requires Improvement to Inadequate. The home is in special measures. CQC required an action plan and imposed registration conditions requiring suitably qualified oversight of risk, safeguarding and governance.
People felt safe and supported
Despite the inspection findings, people said they were happy living at the home and felt supported by staff.
“I am happy here, I feel safe. The staff are smashing, they are very good.” from the report
People were involved in choices
People said staff listened to them, explained what they were doing and involved them in decisions about their care.
“I have choices. I choose what time to wake up and go to bed. I choose what I want to do. The staff help me.” from the report
Partnership working
The provider worked with health and social care professionals, including therapists and nurses, and relatives gave positive feedback about obtaining suitable equipment.
“They have worked really hard to get my relative the right equipment. They have worked really hard with the occupational therapist and physiotherapist.” from the report
Safeguarding failures
seriousIncidents involving abuse and distressed behaviour were not always investigated or referred to the local safeguarding team. This left people at risk of harm.
“The provider failed to submit safeguarding referrals to the local authority safeguarding team in accordance with their regulatory responsibility.” from the report
Incomplete risk management
seriousImportant risk assessments were missing for conditions and situations including epilepsy, diabetes, distressed behaviour and not having a call bell within reach.
“Risk assessments were not always in place to guide staff how to manage and mitigate risks to people.” from the report
Medicines were not always safe
seriousMedicine fridge temperatures were not managed correctly, pain relief patches were not checked daily, and one person's changed pain medicine did not have an administration protocol.
“Medicines were not always managed safely.” from the report
Dignity and personal care
needs fixingInspectors saw a person left undressed with personal care needs unmet, and another person eating without cutlery. The report says people were not always treated with dignity.
“People were not always treated with dignity.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousAudits did not consistently identify problems or record follow-up action. The provider had not learnt enough from the previous inspection, and governance remained in breach.
“The continued lack of oversight of the care and support provided placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
Environmental and infection risks
needs fixingWindow restrictors were missing, equipment was stored in communal areas, thickened drinks were left unattended, and infection control practices were not always safe.
“Environmental risks were not always managed safely which placed people at risk of harm.” from the report
- 01What specific changes have been made to investigate and report safeguarding incidents, including incidents involving distressed behaviour?
- 02How are risk assessments for diabetes, epilepsy, distressed behaviour and call bell access now checked and kept up to date?
- 03How are medicine fridge temperatures, pain relief patches and as-needed pain medicines now monitored?
- 04What training have staff completed on diabetes, epilepsy and responding safely to distressed behaviour?
- 05Who is providing the suitably qualified oversight required by the registration conditions, and how is their work recorded?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, widened to include Caring; Effective and Responsive were not inspected and their ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 September 2024 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Beechfields Nursing Home Limited
8 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Requires improvement to Inadequate.
- September 2024Inadequatecurrent ratingdown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
Read what inspectors found at Beechfields Nursing Home Limited →
- May 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementCaring: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2018Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 May 2019.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.