Brook Lodge Care 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.

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.

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.

Staff completed daily notes for people which we reviewed and found these to be well detailed and related to the individual person. Staff were able to describe the needs of the people they supported and we observed positive interactions and activities taking place during our assessment. Staff had received training in dignity and person-centred care.

People and their relatives told us they felt staff knew them well. Comments included, “They [staff] know [person] as an individual and their likes and dislikes, [Person] gets up early as always been an early bird” and “Staff have got to know [person] and their likes and dislikes.”

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.

There was good continuity of care at Brook Lodge Care Home and the staff knew people well. Staff communicated well with external health and social care professionals to support people’s needs. Feedback from healthcare professionals was positive. One healthcare professional told us staff were always approachable and knowledgeable. The provider also encouraged professionals to give feedback and we saw evidence of feedback forms completed by external healthcare professionals which was positive.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs were recorded to ensure staff knew their preferred way of communicating. Staff undertook advanced training in specialist areas such as dementia care to make sure they knew how to enhance communication with people.

The provider used technology to share regular communications and information such as newsletters with people and their relatives. People’s information was kept secure and confidential.

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 and their relatives were given residents guides that explain how to make complaints and this was also discussed at residents’ meetings. Relatives told us that they were aware of the complaint’s procedure and that leaflets and information could be found in the reception area of the home.

The provider had processes in place for regular meetings with people and we saw evidence of this in meeting minutes. The provider had a compliments and complaints folder and they completed reflective practice and lessons learned with regards to complaints. One relative told us about a complaint they had made previously and the actions the provider had taken which they were satisfied with.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were supported to attend healthcare appointments and the provider arranged for external healthcare professionals such as an optician, chiropodist and dentist to attend the home. Relatives we spoke with confirmed people had been able to access external healthcare, one comment included, “[Person] has seen a dentist and optician since they have been here.”

Care plans were accessible to staff and we saw evidence of referrals made to external healthcare professionals such as GP’s and district nurses.

Within the home, people had access to various therapeutic activities such as a hair salon, cinema and library.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The provider engaged with a range of different external health professionals to ensure people at Brook Lodge Care Home had access to the services they need.

Staff respected people’s independence, choice and privacy when providing support with personal care.Staff had completed training in equality and diversity and understood people had a right to be treated fairly and equally.

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. We saw people’s care plans included their wishes and preferences around aspects of their care such as end of life care and funeral arrangements. Some care plans did not have full details around end of life care, but clearly detailed those people were not ready at this present time to discuss their wishes and this was revisited at each review.