The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Brookholme Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

23 Somersall Lane, Chesterfield, Derbyshire, S40 3LA (01246) 569662

Provided and run by:
Rosecare (Brookholme) LLP

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

8 March 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 8 and 14 March 2017. The service was last inspected on 24 November 2015, when they were rated as Requires Improvement. We asked the provider to send us an action plan to show how they intended to improve the service, and they did this. On this inspection, we found that improvements had been made, and the service now met all requirements of the relevant regulations.

Brookholme Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 40 people. At the time of our inspection, there were 36 people living in the service. The first day of our inspection visit was unannounced.

The service had a registered manager at the time of our 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm. Risks associated with care were identified and assessed. Staff had clear guidance about how to meet people’s individual needs. Care plans were regularly reviewed with people and updated to meet their changing needs and preferences.

People were happy with staff who provided their personal care. They were cared for by sufficient numbers of staff who were suitably skilled, experienced and knowledgeable about people’s needs. People were also supported by staff in a caring way, which ensured they received personal care with dignity and respect.

The provider took action to ensure that potential staff were suitable to work with people needing care. Staff received supervision and had regular checks on their knowledge and skills. They also received regular training in a range of skills the provider felt necessary to meet the needs of people at the service.

The systems for managing medicines were safe, and staff worked in cooperation with health and social care professionals to ensure that people received appropriate healthcare and treatment in a timely manner.

Appropriate arrangements were in place to assess whether people were able to consent to their care. The provider was meeting the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS).

People were supported to be involved in their care planning and delivery. The support people received was tailored to meet their individual needs, wishes and aspirations. People, their relatives, and staff felt able to raise concerns or suggestions in relation to the quality of care. The provider had a complaints procedure to ensure that issues with quality of care were addressed.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensure people received safe and effective care. These included seeking and responding to feedback from people in relation to the standard of care. Regular checks were undertaken on all aspects of care provision and actions were taken to improve people’s experience of care.

24 and 26 November 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 24 and 26 November 2015 and was unannounced.

We had previously carried out an inspection on 6 February 2014 when we found the service had breached the regulations relating to cleanliness and infection control, and to the management of medicines. On this inspection we found the provider had taken action in relation to this.

Brookholme is a 40 bed residential home in a suburb of Chesterfield. The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to 40 older people. At the time of our inspection there were 40 people living there. A number of people at the home were living with a diagnosis of dementia.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 told us they felt safely cared for. Staff were trained and knew how to recognise people at risk of harm. They knew how to report concerns.

There were safe recruitment procedures in place. The provider carried out checks to ensure that suitable people were recruited. Staff undertook an induction before being assessed as competent to provide care and had a probationary period. The provider had policies and procedures in place if staff did not meet the standards expected of them.

People and their relatives felt there were not enough staff employed to provide care. Staff had mixed views on this, and we saw there were times when there was a risk of people not receiving support to take part in hobbies and activities as they wished.

Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely and in accordance with professional guidance. Staff received training and ongoing monitoring of their skills and knowledge.

People were cared for in an environment that was clean and well managed to prevent the risk of infections. Staff were trained in and understood their roles and responsibilities in the prevention of infection.

People were supported by staff who received training and supervision to ensure that they had the skills the provider felt necessary for their role. Staff demonstrated good knowledge about people’s care needs and preferences, but this was not always reflected in the written care plans.

People’s dietary needs were met. They had regular drinks and snacks, and diets to meet their health needs. Staff provided alternative meal choices and people were involved in discussions about the menu.

Staff obtained consent from people before providing support. Where people were not able to give their consent, not all staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.

Staff knew people well and could tell us how to provide care that was person centred. However, people were not always involved in planning and reviewing their care, and aspects of care did not uphold people’s dignity.

The provider sought feedback about the service from people, their relatives, visitors and staff. There were a variety of ways people could make their views known. However, there was no clear way of supporting people to make their views known or make complaints if they had communication difficulties or other impairments that reduced the likelihood of them speaking up.

There were systems in place to monitor and review all aspects of the service. However, these did not always identify gaps in people’s care planning. This meant identifying areas of good practice and areas for improvement was inconsistent.

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

At our visit there were 39 people living at Brookholme. Four people we spoke with said they were satisfied with their care and the general cleanliness of the home. One person told us, 'The staff, are fantastic, we don't want for anything.' Another person said, 'I am happy here, the food is very good and there's plenty of choice; I get my hair and nails done every week here and go out from time to time.'

We found that people experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights and they were asked for their consent to their care. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements.

However, we found that people were not always cared for in a clean, hygienic environment and not fully protected against the risks of infection and those associated with unsafe medicines practice.

4 February 2013

During a routine inspection

The people we spoke to told us they were happy in the home and felt they were well cared for. The relatives we spoke to told us they were happy with the care provided. One relative told us that she had moved her mother from another home and was much happier with the care provided at Brookholme. Another relative told us his mother was content to be there. Another relative told us that her father had taken time to settle on arriving at the home but that staff had been patient and kind and that he was much happier.

People told us they went out for walks and one person attended nearby church services. We saw a programme of planned activities and that people had attended a christmas nativity play in a local school.

The home was free from odours and on the day of inspection several new armchairs were being delivered to replace older items of furniture.

We saw staff interacting with people including the activities coordinator who was leading a sing along event. People spoke highly about the staff and said they were all very nice. We spoke to one person who preferred to be in her own room so that she could complete a crossword puzzle.

15 September 2011

During a routine inspection

At our visit there were 40 people accommodated, receiving person care. All were British white and of Christian religion. We held discussions with seven of them and looked at the care and services that three of those people received more closely

People told us the received the information they needed about the service, both to assist in their admission there and with regard to their daily lives in the home. All said their care and personal support needs were discussed and agreed with them, or where appropriate with their representatives, including by way of regular care reviews.

People generally felt that their rights to privacy, dignity, independence and to make choices about their daily living arrangements were respected. They said they were able to engage in resident's meetings that were regularly held and were kept informed as to changes and events by way of the home's newsletters. All said that activities were usually organised that they could choose to join along with social events and seasonal celebrations.

People told us they were comfortable in the home and that they received the care and support they needed. They also said they were provided with food they enjoyed. One person said, 'The cook is very good.' 'He always talks with us about what we want on the menu.'

People described satisfactory arrangements for their medicines and to enable their access to outside health and social care professionals, both for the purposes of routine health screening and specialist care and advice when required.

One person recently admitted to the home said.' Staff, are really good.' They have organised for the district nurse to come in and do my dressings. 'I feel so much better.'

Another said, 'Staff, are very kind, they listen and help me when needed.'

Discussions held with people helped to inform our decisions about what the service does well, how they comply the Essential Standards of Quality and Safety and also improvements that need to be made.