Rated Care Homes

Copper Beeches

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 7 ratings

    First rated Inadequate in 2015, most recently Good in August 2026.

  • 2 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 42 of 59

    rated care homes in Medway are rated Good, like this one.

Copper Beeches: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 36 beds, Medway

Rated Good in August 2026.

Copper Beeches: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Sir Evelyn Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. RI
    Valley View Care Home Ltd Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Friston House Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. –
    St Williams Not yet rated, 0.7 miles away
  5. RI
    Fort Horsted Care Home Ltd Requires improvement, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Medway

See all care homes in Walderslade

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 3 August 2026 (assessment visit 30 April 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

The inspection was carried out between 13 May 2026 and 15 June 2026. Copper Beeches is a care home with nursing supporting up to 36 people, including people living with dementia and complex health needs.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

This is the first rating for this newly registered service.

People received care from staff who were kind, compassionate and treated them with dignity and respect. We observed positive interactions where staff reassured people, explained care clearly and promoted choice and independence. Care plans were detailed and personalised, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s individual needs and preferences.

Staff were recruited safely. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs and there was a programme of training to support staff skills. Staff understood safeguarding processes and how to report concerns.

The service was clean and infection prevention and control practices were mostly effective. However, improvements were required in some areas. Medicines were not always well managed. There had been a number of medicine stock discrepancies. Although nursing staff took action to ensure people were not harmed there had not always been effective management oversight in this area to prevent repeat occurrences. Some governance processes had only recently begun such as staff supervisions and regular clinical governance meetings. These practices needed embedding to help strengthen governance at the service. Auditing systems were not consistently effective at driving improvement in the service. Where audits had identified areas of practice that were not fully compliant this had not always led to action that addressed issues. We found some previously identified areas of practice had come up again at the next audit as still not compliant.

There was a refurbishment plan in place for the service and people’s rooms had recently been decorated. However, further work was needed and had been planned to improve the communal areas of the service. The environment was not always well managed, with inappropriate use of space and gaps in safety checks of people’s equipment. Part of the refurbishment plans were to build storage on the grounds of the service in the future.

  1. Safe

    Good

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

    This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 3 August 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  2. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Wayne Cooksey
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
16185953 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Medway Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Copper Beeches provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Copper Beeches as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Copper Beeches have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 36 beds at Copper Beeches.
When was Copper Beeches last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Copper Beeches was published on 3 August 2026.
Who runs Copper Beeches?
Copper Beeches is run by Belmont Healthcare (Copper Beeches) Limited.
What is Copper Beeches's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 3 August 2026.

Contact

Phone
01634 624540
Address
5 Sylewood Close, Borstal, Rochester, ME1 3LL Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Sir Evelyn Road Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. RI
    Valley View Care Home Ltd Requires improvement, 0.1 miles away
  3. G
    Friston House Good, 0.6 miles away
  4. –
    St Williams Not yet rated, 0.7 miles away
  5. RI
    Fort Horsted Care Home Ltd Requires improvement, 0.9 miles away

See all care homes in Medway

See all care homes in Walderslade