Brooklyn House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans detailed people’s needs and captured people’s preferences and choices. Staff were familiar with people’s needs and were able to tell us how people liked to be supported and knew them well. Not all people at Brooklyn House nursing home were able to tell us about their experience. Relatives told us they had been involved with their loved one’s care plans. A relative told us, “[Person] has a care plan, and we were all involved in setting it up.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The registered manager told us that they worked with the GP, who supported in referring people to relevant healthcare professionals when needed. We saw care plans evidenced healthcare professional’s visits and care plans being reviewed on the advice from healthcare professionals.

The registered manager ensured continuity of care by sending information with people if they were admitted to hospital.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s communication needs and preferences were assessed and clearly recorded in their care plans. Staff understood how to effectively communicate with each person. For example, we saw staff supporting people with patience to enable them time to express what they wanted and time when the staff asked them a question.

The provider could make information available in a range of formats, for example we saw large bold print service newsletters and communication boards to support with sharing and receiving information with people.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People told us that they could attend a monthly meeting and saw the registered manager regularly around the home. The service had a resident who was the resident ambassador at Brooklyn House nursing home. They told us that they were involved in liaising with the registered manager, bringing things forward from people and had sat on interview panels for potential staff for the service.

A relative told us, “I always speak to [registered manager], they don’t just sit in their office all day, you see them about talking to all residents. If I had an issue, they would definitely listen.”

Complaints and concerns were recorded and responded to by the registered manager.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff arranged regular visits from health and social care professionals, and sought advice when they noticed changes, for example after falls or when new health concerns were identified.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities or prejudices that effected outcomes for people. Feedback from people and relatives showed that people felt safe, respected and well supported.

A relative said, “They always seem open and honest and happy to answer questions. I am no expert, but they all seem to know what they are doing and are caring.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Where preferences were expressed, these were recorded within people’s care plans to help ensure choices were understood and respected. For example, people had care plans supporting their wishes at end of life, including people’s wishes regarding ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation.’ For people who were not ready to discuss or want their end of life wishes recorded; this was documented in people's care plans.