Brooklands Homecare Ltd - Edenbridge

Updated 3 March 2026

Date of Assessment: 16 March 2026 to 02 April 2026. Brooklands Homecare Ltd - Edenbridge is a domiciliary care service that provides ‘Personal Care’ for older people and younger adults, some of whom were living with dementia. At the time of this inspection the service was providing care for 42 people.

This assessment was undertaken due to the length of time since the last inspection.

We identified 2 breaches of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance.

The inspection found that underpinning systems and governance were not yet robust. Some risks for people had not been assessed, for example risks in relation people’s catheter or specific health conditions. People’s risk assessments and care plans did not always contain detailed or up-to-date guidance for example around skin integrity concerns and had not always been reviewed following changes. Medicines management required significant improvement, with unsafe practices, missing information, and inaccuracies in Medicine Administration Records (MAR) charts. Oversight processes such as audits for incident analysis, medicines, and care records were not up to date. This limited leaders’ ability to ensure safe and effective care. Leaders responded constructively to inspection feedback and implemented an immediate action plan during the inspection to strengthen governance, improve record‑keeping and increase audit activity.

Despite the concerns found, the culture of the service was positive. People received care from a small, familiar staff team who were consistently described as kind, respectful and supportive. People told us they felt safe at home and valued the continuity of regular carers who knew them well. Staff worked collaboratively with families and supported people to remain independent in their daily routines. Visits were usually on time and people felt listened to, respected and involved in day‑to‑day decisions. Staff felt valued and supported.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this inspection.

During this inspection we spoke with 4 people and 5 relatives. We spoke with the nominated individual/registered manager, the branch manager, care supervisor as well as senior care and care staff. We also received feedback from a professional. We looked at records of people’s care as well as records to support the management of the service.

Updated 3 March 2026

People consistently told us they felt safe, well‑supported and treated with kindness by staff providing their care. People described staff as “Very kind and caring” and “So lovely and thoughtful”, and relatives said the service gave them “Peace of mind.” Several people said staff felt “Like family,” and that familiarity with regular carers helped them feel reassured and comfortable.

People told us staff supported them at a pace that suited them. A relative said, “[Person] feels very physically supported by [staff].” Staff encouraged independence where possible. A person said, “[Staff] encourage me to be as independent as I want to be.” People felt staff knew them well, remembering their preferences and daily routines. Relatives described staff as patient and attentive, with 1 noting that their carer was “Outstanding… brilliant with us all.”

People reported staff arrived on time and stayed for the full duration of calls. Most stated there were no missed visits, and relatives appreciated being informed if staff were running slightly late. Several people described thorough initial assessments that helped them feel confident with the service. People felt involved in assessments and care plan decisions, often alongside family members. People said staff supported them effectively with meals, personal care and maintaining their health. They valued being offered choices, such as what to eat or wear. Those who needed help with mobility or health conditions felt staff monitored concerns and communicated clearly with relatives.

People told us they felt comfortable raising issues but had no complaints, reporting positive communication with the registered manager, who was described as “Hands on,” “Approachable,” and “Very good at reporting things.”

Overall, people experienced caring and person‑centred interactions from the service which were respectful and supportive. The positive rapport between staff, people and relatives contributed to an atmosphere of safety, trust and genuine compassion.