Archived: Brook House

About the service

Brook House is a residential and nursing home and was providing personal and nursing care to 30 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 35 people.

Brook House is an older style property which has been adapted to provide facilities and accommodation for people with a range of physical needs.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People and their relatives were complimentary about the service. One relative told us, “I am very pleased with the care here. The staff are amazing. One person told us, “They can’t do enough for you.”

Staff we spoke with confirmed they had received training in safeguarding and knew what action to take if they felt people were being abused. Recruitment files confirmed staff had been safely recruited.

Risks associated with people’s care and support needs had been identified and actions taken to minimise risks. Care plans were individualised and reflected people’s preferences.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

We observed staff interacting in a positive way. People told us they enjoyed living at the service.

Staff had been trained in the administration of medicines. People received their medicines in line with the prescriber’s instructions.

Staff received an induction when they first joined the service and regular training was completed and refreshed when required. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and had received regular supervisions and support.

People were able to take part in community social events and an in-house activities programme was available.

A complaints procedure was in place. Relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. The provider had a quality auditing system in place. Accidents and incidents were documented and reviewed as necessary.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 14 June 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

We previously inspected the service on 27 and 28 January 2016. The service was meeting the requirements of the regulations at that time. However, we made three recommendations to improve practice at the service.

Brook House is a care home providing nursing care for up to 35 older people. Thirty three people were living at the service at the time of our visit.

The service had 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We received positive feedback about the service. A relative told us “I see a lot of what goes on here as I am here most days and it’s a good standard of care.” Relatives told us their family members received appropriate healthcare support. One said their family member’s mobility had improved since they had been at the home. People spoke positively about the meals provided for them. Typical comments included “Plenty to eat and I have no complaints” and “The food is really good here.” People told us staff were kind and caring. For example, “The staff are very kind and caring” and “The staff are very nice to me.”

When we visited the service in January 2016, we made three recommendations to improve the quality of people’s care. These were in relation to promoting people's dignity when assisting them with moving and handling, following good practice in involving people in decision-making processes about their care and improving people's links with the local and wider communities. We found improvements had been made in each of these areas.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Recruitment procedures were thorough to make sure people were supported by staff with the right skills and attributes. Staff received appropriate support through a structured induction, regular supervision and an annual appraisal of their performance. Staff undertook training to meet the needs of the people they cared for.

People’s needs were recorded in care plans. These were detailed and had been kept under review. Work had started to find out more about people’s backgrounds and personal histories through involving relatives. This helped staff to better understand the lives of the people they supported and what was important to them.

Refurbishment was taking place. At the time of the inspection, the provider was working through a planned refurbishment programme of the home. The refurbishment plan had begun in January 2016. It would include areas of the home which now looked worn, including older parts of the building.

We saw electrical cables had been left plugged into the wall and trailed onto the floor after staff had disconnected the equipment or appliances they belonged to. We acknowledge the registered manager took action straight away once this was brought to their attention. The registered manager was able to show us staff were made aware of health and safety concerns as and when they arose. We have made a recommendation about electrical safety.

There were various systems to monitor the quality of care, such as surveys, audits and visits by the provider.

We previously inspected the service on 20 February 2014. The service was meeting the requirements of the regulations at that time.

Brook House is a care home providing nursing care for up to 35 older people. Thirty one people were living at the service at the time of our visit.

The service had 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 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

We received positive feedback about the service. Comments included “I am very happy here, everyone is kind and cheerful and nothing I can say would improve it,” and “It’s like home from home; I would recommend it to family.” Other comments included “It’s lovely here” and “I like the way I’m looked after.” A relative said “We genuinely believe that they are caring, it’s a lovely atmosphere and because they care, everything is right. It feels like a lovely home.” One of the staff we spoke with told us “I’m proud to be a nurse in this nursing home.”

There were safeguarding procedures and training on abuse to provide staff with the skills and knowledge to recognise and respond to safeguarding concerns. Written risk assessments had been prepared to reduce the likelihood of injury or harm to people during the provision of their care. People’s medicines were handled safely and given to them in accordance with their prescriptions.

We found there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. They were recruited using robust procedures to make sure people were supported by staff with the right skills and attributes. Staff received appropriate support through regular supervision and staff meetings There was an on-going training programme to provide and update staff on safe ways of working.

Care plans had been written, to document people’s needs and their preferences for how they wished to be supported. These had been kept up to date to reflect changes in people’s needs. People were supported to take part in activities. Staff referred people to external healthcare professionals as necessary, to help keep them healthy and well.

People knew how to raise any concerns and were relaxed when speaking with staff and the registered manager. We saw complaints were dealt with appropriately.

The building complied with gas and electrical safety standards. Equipment was serviced to make sure it was in safe working order. Evacuation plans had been written for each person, to help support them safely in the event of an emergency.

The service was managed well. The provider regularly checked quality of care at the service through visits and audits. There were clear visions and values for how the service should operate and staff promoted these. For example, people told us they were treated with dignity and respect and we saw they were given choices. Records were maintained to a good standard and staff had access to policies and procedures to guide their practice.

We have made recommendations about promoting people’s dignity when assisting them with moving and handling, ensuring people are involved in decision-making processes about their care and improving people’s links with the local and wider communities.

People told us the care was very good. One person said 'It's really first class'.

We found people's needs were assessed and that care was provided in line with their care plan.

There were policies and processes to prevent abuse and to alert managers and the local authority if there were concerns.

Staffing numbers were adequate and staff were supported to do their jobs.

The provider regularly sought people's views on the service and took account of those when planning future services.

Records were kept and were clear and reviewed regularly.

We found people's needs were assessed and care was provided in line with their care plan. People were protected from the risk of inadequate nutrition. People were protected against the risk of abuse. There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. Staff were supported in providing care and support to people. The organisation had arrangements for monitoring the quality of the service.