Brook Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 50 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. Staff did not always treat colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

During the inspection, we observed some positive interactions where staff treated people kindly and maintained their dignity. People and relatives also told us staff were kind. However, feedback about people’s experiences of care was mixed, indicating this was not consistently reflected in day-to-day practice.

Some relatives raised concerns about the quality of care people received. One relative said, “The staff are lovely but there is not a lot of time spent with the residents. Staff are always rushing around but not doing things with people.” Another relative told us, “My relative is often in the same clothes for a couple of days and I have found them in bed with the same clothes on they wore the day before.” These concerns demonstrated people’s dignity and personal care needs were not always met.

Other feedback was more positive. One person told us, “Staff are very kind, very good indeed.” A relative said, “The carers are very caring and loving to my relative.” However, the variability in feedback showed the provider was not consistently assuring kind, person-centred care.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Care plans and risk assessments were not always up to date or consistent and whilst information related to people’s needs and preferences and contained person centred information, we were not assured all staff were aware of the most up to date information. Regular staff knew the people they supported well; however, people and relatives told us they received inconsistent information from staff. A relative told us, “The senior carers and management are poor at communication.” They explained they could speak to one staff member about an issue around their relative’s care and find a few days later that message had not been passed on.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

As stated in the consent to care section staff lacked understanding in promoting people’s choice and control.

We received mixed feedback regarding activities and things to do in the home. A person told us, “We don’t really have any, what activities. I don’t want to sit in my room all day, so I come out here but there is only about three of us that speak to each other the rest are asleep.” A relative said, “I would like to see more activities and staff encouraging people to take part. There is no encouragement. I see them ask a person once if they want to do an activity and then they walk away if they say no. People need more support and explanation.”

A new activity staff member had recently started at the service, and people and relatives had begun to see some improvement. The activity staff member told us, “This is my first job, I love it here. I started 3 days a week but because there is no activities manager I am now work 5 days. I try and get everyone involved. We offer choices and if they don’t like something I have to think of something new."

The provider told us they were actively trying to recruit more support in this area. A person told us, “I try to go down for the chair exercise. Staff will also take me to the garden, I like gardening and I can get involved out there.” A relative said, “Some weeks they have lots to do and other weeks nothing. It has been better in last few weeks.”

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We received mixed feedback from people about how quickly they were responded to and some people told us they had to wait for their care. Some people told us their food was often cold when they received it. However, records indicated call bell response times were improving since shifts were now being actively covered by temporary staff.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

The service had experienced significant changes in respect of a different provider taking overall control and this had impacted on staff well-being who were coping with changes in systems, processes and paperwork. Staff told us they were supported by the management team but had found additional paperwork impacted on their job role.

Feedback about staff well-being remained very mixed. A staff member told us, “You do not get time to do our job. Their [provider] focus is to add more paperwork. The manager and Deputy manager are trying their best.” Another staff member said, “I have good qualifications, but they do not help me to progress.”

Other staff were more complimentary about the support available. Staff told us, “I do feel valued as team member, I have a good relationship with the care team and within my own department” and “Yes, I feel supported through teamwork and training opportunities. I always aim to provide safe, person-centred care and residents to be happy.”