Benslow Nursing Home

Who the service is for

The service supports older people and people living with dementia across three floors and also provides nursing care. The service is adapted to meet the needs of people with impaired mobility and also has shared facilities so people can continue to live together.

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 24 June 2026 and 06 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

On an exceptionally hot day we found improvements at that time were required to managing temperatures in the home and monitoring those who were vulnerable to heat. Peoples care needs were met by in a timely way, although improvements were being embedded to ensure staff were effectively deployed. The registered manager had developed a training plan to ensure enough staff with the skills and knowledge to support people were in place.

Systems were in place to keep people safe from the risks of neglect or abuse with staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities. Risks were assessed as people’s needs changed and in partnership with those people and representatives where necessary. Medicines were administered safely given safely, and managed, by staff who were trained to do so, with regular ongoing assessments of the competency to safely do so. A visiting professional said, “The staff are very welcoming. The RM is polite and professional. I respect these people. I know how hard their job is. I have no safeguarding concerns.”

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this is through the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were applied for correctly and monitored appropriately. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions, and they had choice, control, and freedom over their lives.

People’s care was initially assessed and then continually planned with them and their relative where appropriate. People said that any adjustments which could improve the quality of their life and enhance their outcomes were provided. People experienced an approach to planning and monitoring care that balanced risks with people’s wishes and preferences. Care plans were well written and captured key areas of people’s needs and risks. This included areas such as diabetes, mobility, nutritional needs, skin integrity and pressure area care, and emotional support. Staff worked as a team and with other health professionals such as GP’s nursing teams and dementia services to ensure peoples care was monitored and responded to when needed. One relative said, “[Persons] personal care is spot on.”

People were supported by a dedicated and caring team, who appeared passionate about the people they supported. Staff offered and promoted choices in a ways people understood and responded to positively. Staff spoke with a genuine affection about people and in doing so therefore acknowledged their individuality and respected their privacy and dignity. The staff team actively promoted people's independence, enabling them to live life as fully as possible. The management team had developed and embedded a culture of person-centred care, where that care provided met their needs, choices and preferences.

The registered manager and their team worked in an open and transparent culture where staff were encouraged to speak up and learn lessons to improve the care people received. The management team were supportive and approachable, the registered manager was visible in the service, for example visiting every person in the home when they arrived for their shift. Staff and people said the registered manager was approachable, supportive and they were able to listen to feedback constructively to improve the service. During this inspection we found the registered manager to be very open and transparent with feedback given, and they took immediate actions to make those required improvement.