The Reigate Beaumont (Reigate Beaumont) is a care home with nursing that is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to sixty people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home is an adapted building over two floors with easy access between floors via a lift. There are two communal lounge areas and two dining rooms, together with vast grounds and gardens.

The inspection took place on 20 March 2018 and was unannounced. At the time of our inspection 56 people were living in the home.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager assisted us with our inspection.

People’s medicines were not always handled in a safe way by staff. Although we found administration of medicines was not an issue, dispensing and good medicines practices were lacking. We saw staff attending to people’s needs on the day, however we found deployment of staff was not always organised in such a way that people received a staff member’s full attention or received support when they needed it. We also found a lack of attention to detail for some people.

People were cared for by staff who were kind, caring, attentive and showed respect towards them. People could have privacy when they wished it and they were given the opportunity to contribute to their care plan. Information for people was provided in a way they would understand and where there were restrictions in place staff followed the principals of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People’s care plans were person centred and where a person’s needs changed staff responded to this. Staff ensured people had access to health care professionals when they needed it as well as to a range of nutritious food. Staff used national guidance to support them to provide effective care. Where people had accidents or incidents staff took appropriate action and as such reflected on incidents to aid their learning.

Risks to people had been identified and guidance was in place for staff. Before people moved into the home their needs were assessed to ensure staff could provide effective, safe and responsive care. The home was adapted to meet people’s needs and staff ensured people were not at risk of infection or abuse because they understood their responsibilities in respect of these. This was aided by the registered provider’s robust recruitment process.

Health and safety and quality assurance processes were in place to check the environment that people lived in was safe and the service people received was of a good quality. In the event of a fire there was fire information available for staff and the emergency services.

People were cared for by a consistent staff team who felt supported by the registered manager and had access to the training and supervision they required in order to carry out their role. Staff worked together as a team and the culture within the service was good. Staff met on a regular basis to discuss all aspects of the service.

People were given the opportunity to give their feedback on the care they received. Although people had access to a range of activities evidence of people who stayed in their room receiving one to one time with staff was lacking. However, people were happy with the care they received from staff and told us they were confident if they had any concerns or complaints these would be addressed.

The registered manager had developed a positive culture within the home. One that was open and transparent. They had worked well with

The Reigate Beaumont is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to sixty people. The home is located on the outskirts on Reigate town and close to local amenities. The home is owned and operated by Barchester Healthcare Homes Limited a major provider of social care in the UK. The home can offer respite care and long term care. People had access to several communal lounges and dining areas which overlooked attractive gardens.

The service had a registered manager in post on the day of the inspection visit. ‘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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Risks were well managed and when risks were identified assessments were in place to minimise the risk to people. These were supported by guidance in people’s care plans to help keep them safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff who were appropriately trained to meet the needs of the people who lived at the service. Staff received regular support in the form of annual appraisals and formal supervision.

Staff recruitment procedures were robust to ensure that staff had appropriate checks undertaken before they commenced employment.

People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and were able to evidence to us they knew the procedures to follow should they have any concerns. They told us they would report anything they were uneasy with to the nurse in charge.

Medicines were well managed and people had their medicines when they needed them. All medicines were administered and disposed of in a safe way.

Where people’s liberty may be restricted to keep them safe, the provider had followed the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure the persons rights were protected.

People were encouraged and supported to be involved in their care. People’s bedrooms had been decorated to a good standard and were personalised with their own possessions. One person was able to have their dog with them.

Health care needs were being met. People had access to a range of health care professionals, such as the GP, a community psychiatric nurse, dentist and opticians. Qualified nurses managed some health needs of people.

People told us the food was very good and there was lots of choice. We saw people had access to drinks and snacks at any time during the day or night.

Staff were kind and compassionate. We saw people were treated with and respect and their privacy and dignity was respected at all times. For example staff knocked on people’s doors before they entered their room.

People had individual care plans which gave clear guidance to staff on what support people needed. They were detailed and updated regularly. Relatives told us they had been consulted regarding people’s care plans and were able to attend reviews of care.

The registered manager operated an open door policy and we saw several examples of people, relatives and staff visiting the office to discuss various subjects or just for a chat. The registered manager also ensured she visited people in their rooms if they were unable to access the open door policy.

People were aware of the complaint procedures and told us they would know how to make a complaint. A relative told us they were satisfied with the way their complaint was managed.

The registered manager had ensured that accurate records relating to the care and treatment of people and the overall management of the service were maintained. The registered manager and deputy manager had systems in place to record and monitor the quality of the service provided and to make improvements where necessary. Accidents and incidents were recorded and acted upon.

People would be p

People who used the service and their representatives were given appropriate information regarding the home to enable them to make an informed choice about living there.

One person told us they chose the home to be near their family and another person who used the service told us that the views were so pretty it was the deciding factor in their choice.

People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with individual care plans. People were involved in their care planning as much as possible. One person who used the service told us the care was excellent and the staff were kind and caring. A relative said the staff always have a welcome smile.

We saw the home was clean and hygienic and people told us their room and bathroom were cleaned daily. We also noted the home provided ample well furbished accommodation for people to enjoy.

People were protected by the safeguarding procedures in place and staff were knowledgeable about these procedures.

The staff told us they felt they had the appropriate training and support to enable them to undertake their roles.

We saw people had access to the home's complaints procedure and they were confident their concerns and suggestions would be listened to and acted upon.

It was possible to met and talk to people living in Reigate Beaumont who expressed their views and comments about living in the home. They told us that the staff were kind and caring and that they were well cared for.

People told us that they were consulted regarding their care and treatment and we saw evidence in individual care plans that reflected their vires.

We were told that the food was good and people attended a meeting with the chef during our visit to discuss menus.

Staff told us that they liked working in the home and that they had the support and training necessary to undertake their roles and responsibilities.

We found the health, safety and welfare of the people who used the service and the staff was observed to be promoted.

The home was managed by an experienced manager with the skills and qualifications necessary to undertake her role efficiently. people we spoke to felt well supported by the management structure in place. We were told "I can always talk to the manager about anything and it will be dealt with efficiently".

We founf systems in place that monitored quality assurance and people told us that they are consulted about how the home is managed and asked for their comments.

People who use the service told us that they experience a good level of care and support and felt that their needs and aspirations were being met. They felt that their dignity and privacy was observed and respected, and that staff always knocked on their door before entering their bedroom and explained what they were going to do.

A service user told us they had the freedom to come and go as they liked, and could invite their family to dine with them. Another service user told us that the staff were very kind, but sometimes there are not enough staff to oversee meal times.

We were told by several people using the service that they are consulted about the care and treatment they receive and involved in any changes.

Two relatives told us that they are kept updated about changing needs, and events taking place in the home.

Several people made positive comments regarding the facilities in the home and how it is maintained to an excellent standard.

There were mainly good feedback regarding the meals and meat times. Some people said the food was “excellent, and plenty of it”, while others said the standard was “not so good, with too much salt and fat content”. The chef told us that she had daily contact with the people using the service and comments were addressed and complaints corrected immediately.

People told us that there was always something to do or someone to talk to. One person told us “I like to attend the music sessions”, and another said “I like to attend the church services organised”.

The majority of people spoken to felt very satisfied with the home the facilities and the staff.