The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Brooke House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

123 Millbrook Road East, Freemantle, Southampton, Hampshire, SO15 1HQ (023) 8023 5221

Provided and run by:
Parkcare Homes (No.2) Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

We carried out this inspection from 14 November to 1 December 2025. This inspection was prompted by risks we were made aware of in relation to safe care and treatment. The service is a residential care home providing support to younger adults and people with learning disabilities and autistic people. At the time of the inspection there were 8 people living in the home. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. This means help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do; we also consider any wider social care provided.

The provider had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. Managers made sure staff received training and regular support to maintain good-quality care. People received their medicines as prescribed.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. Staff responded to people in a timely way. The provider supported staff wellbeing.

People knew how to give feedback and were confident the provider took it seriously and acted on it. People received fair and equal care and treatment and were involved in planning their care.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable, and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Audits were effective in monitoring safety and risk in the service, and the provider was motivated to further strengthen governance arrangements during our inspection.

5 September 2018

During a routine inspection

Brooke House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Brooke House provides care and support for younger adults with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorder.

The service has eight rooms in the main house with an attached flat which can house one additional person. The house is laid out over two floors with shared living space and a kitchen on the ground floor. At the time of the inspection there were four people living in the home and one person living in the flat.

At our last inspection we rated the service as Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People living at Brooke House were safe from abuse or neglect. Allegations and incidents were reported and investigated appropriately. Steps were taken to ensure only appropriate staff were recruited and there were enough staff to support people’s needs.

The service was clean and well maintained. People were taught about food hygiene to support them in safely managing their own food and cooking.

People’s risks were assessed and support plans were put in place to minimise risks to people while giving them as much freedom as possible. Medicines were managed safely and people could manage their own medication if appropriate.

People were supported by staff who were trained and skilled. Care and support plans were personalised and detailed to meet people’s needs and preferences. People’s independence and individuality was respected and celebrated by staff.

Staff used different methods to communicate with people and wrote care plans in ways people could understand. People’s care and support plans aimed to develop skills and independence to help them meet their goals.

Staff had a good rapport with people and treated people with kindness and respect. Staff knew people well and understood how to support them, their preferences and personal histories.

People and staff spoke highly of the deputy manager and of the quality improvement lead. At the time of the inspection the registered manager had left the previous week. There were good support arrangements in place while the provider recruited a new manager. There were good processes in place to check the quality of the service and there was a clear plan of improvement in place.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

10 & 13 November 2015

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection on 10 and 13 November 2015. The inspection was unannounced. Brooke House provides accommodation and support for up to nine people with a learning disability or who have autism spectrum disorder. There were nine people living at the home when we carried out the inspection.

The home had a registered manager. 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 felt safe living at Brooke House and people were very much at the heart of the service. People were supported to take informed risks. Risk assessments had been completed for the environment and safety checks were conducted regularly of gas and electrical equipment. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to identify, prevent and report abuse.

People were supported to receive their medicines safely from suitably trained staff. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People were involved in the recruitment process and relevant checks were conducted before staff started working at Brooke House to make sure staff were of good character and had the necessary skills. Staff received regular supervision and appraisals where they could discuss their training and development needs.

Staff sought consent from people before providing care or support. Decisions were taken in the best interests of people.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect and staff promoted people’s independence and right to privacy. Staff knew what was important to people and encouraged them to be as independent as possible. People were supported and encouraged to make choices and had access to a range of activities tailored to their specific interests.

Care plans provided comprehensive information about how people wished to receive care and support. This helped ensure people received personalised care in a way that met their individual needs. ‘Residents meetings’ and surveys encouraged people to provide feedback, which was used to improve the service.

People liked living at the home and felt it was well-led. There was an open and transparent culture with people able to access the community as part of their daily activities. There were appropriate management arrangements in place. Staff and people told us they were encouraged to talk to the registered manager about any concerns. Regular audits of the service were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

16 August 2013

During a routine inspection

During the inspection we spoke with four people who were there at the time and we also spoke with four staff and the manager. We observed the staff and people using the service interacted well with each other. A person told us 'this is a fantastic place' and the 'best place I have lived in'. They said the staff looked after them 'very well' and the staff were 'excellent'. We found the staff were courteous and respectful when they dealt with people.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place to support people's needs and independence. People were supported to live an independent life and encouraged to be part of the local community. Staff completed training in safeguarding adults and were aware of their responsibilities to report any concerns.

People were consulted and their views were sought about the care they were receiving. There was a process in place to deal with any concerns and complaints. We saw the staff followed their internal complaints process and responded to people's complaints as required.

30 January 2013

During a routine inspection

During the visit we observed how people spent their time, the support they received from the staff and whether they had positive outcomes. We also spoke to six people who were living at the home, three staff and a care professional. People were very positive about the care and support they were receiving. They commented that 'this is the best place I have lived in'. Another person told us that they all got on well with each other and said 'we are like a family'. They told us that they were offered choices and the staff respected their decisions.

Staff were friendly, respectful and courteous when speaking with people. The care plans were detailed and reflected people's needs and staff said this was helpful in informing their practices. People were supported to plan the home's menu and they were offered a varied diet.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the management of people's medicines. People were supported to be part of the local community and undertook community based activities including attending college. People had access to healthcare professionals and treatment as needed. There was a recruitment process and all necessary staff checks were carried out. There was an internal process for complaints.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at the time of the inspection. Their name appears as they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

1 March 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to a number of the residents and the staff. We observed interactions between the staff and people who use the service. People told us that they were treated with respect and that the staff were' very good.' People were offered choices and there was no restriction to time when they got up or went to bed. People commented that the staff helped them and that it was good living at the home.

They said that they would approach the manager and their support workers with any concerns and were confident these would be addressed. People told us that if they had any problems they could talk to the staff.

People discussed their plans for their Summer holiday to Spain. Another person told us that they went out to work four to five days a week and loved their job. One person told us about moving into the flat next door, as part of their gradual progression to independent living. People also told us that they had joined the gym and would not have been able to achieve this without the staff's support.