You are here

Brunswick Healthcare Requires improvement

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 7 April 2020

About the service

Brunswick Healthcare is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care and support to people with a variety of needs including older people, people living with dementia and physical disability. The agency's office is located in Hove in East Sussex. At the time of our inspection the service was providing personal care to six people.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

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

The registered manager did not have effective oversight of the service and had actively been on site on only three occasions since January 2019. This meant staff felt isolated, unsupported and discouraged. The registered manager had not submitted statutory notifications to the CQC as required. The registered manager acted to address these concerns during the inspection.

At the last inspection quality assurance systems were not always being used to ensure accurate records were maintained and to drive improvements. We recommended the registered manager review and implement robust systems for monitoring all aspects of the service to ensure the quality and safety of the service remained good. At this inspection the registered manager had failed to ensure quality assurance tools were in place and effective at identifying, implementing and sustaining improvements. The registered manager had not engaged with and involved people using the service, the public and staff to improve the service.

Due to the availability of the care coordinator there were enough staff to care for people safely. This had impacted on their time to oversee the quality of care people received. This had not impacted people’s delivery of care or their safety however, more staff were required to ensure the care coordinator was able to do their role more effectively.

Not all staff had received supervision to gain feedback on their performance, identify training needs and discuss any concerns. The registered manager had not ensured staff received training according to national guidance to ensure their skills remained current.

People said they felt safe and were protected from harm. Staff had a good understanding of what safeguarding meant and the procedures for reporting any issues of harm to people. All the staff we spoke with were confident any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by the care coordinator.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured appropriate pre-employment checks were completed to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service. Policies and procedures were in place to ensure the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. Medicines were managed safely. Effective practices were in place to protect people from infection.

The care coordinator and training coordinator carried out spot checks to monitor the quality of the service provided and to seek the views of the people who were supported. People had a choice of meals and told us they had plenty to eat and drink.

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. People received appropriate healthcare support as and when needed and staff knew what to do to request assistance.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who knew them well. People spoke highly of the staff who looked after them and said they were treated with dignity and respect. People were involved in day to day decisions affecting their care. Complaints were investigated and managed appropriately in line with the provider's policy.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

Inspection areas



Updated 7 April 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 7 April 2020

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 7 April 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 7 April 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 7 April 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.