Brooklands Nursing 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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. We observed person-centred interactions between staff and people. Staff engaged positively with people and adapted their communication to meet individual needs. People appeared comfortable in the presence of staff, who took time to offer reassurance, encouragement and meaningful conversation. Care plans were person-centred, containing information about people's preferences, life histories and interests. This helped staff understand what was important to people and supported the delivery of care that reflected their individual wishes and needs.

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. The registered manager promoted continuity of care by ensuring people were supported by a consistent team of staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs, preferences and routines. The service employed its own permanent staff team and only used agency staff to support people receiving one-to-one care where support requirements changed. Where agency staff were required, the service sought to use the same regular agency workers to provide consistency and familiarity for people. Appropriate checks were completed, and agency staff received an induction as well as competency assessments in areas such as medicines management and manual handling.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The registered manager demonstrated an awareness of the Accessible Information Standard and described how information could be adapted to meet people's individual communication needs. For example, at mealtimes the service used pictorial menus alongside display plates containing meal options to help people make informed choices about what they wanted to eat.

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. Most relatives we spoke with were aware of how to raise concerns or make a complaint. Information about complaints and safeguarding was displayed throughout the service.

Memos advertised monthly meetings for people, relatives and staff, with dates planned throughout the year. People were also encouraged to provide feedback when signing out of the service. We reviewed minutes from meetings with people living at the service and saw they were encouraged to participate and share their views. Where people preferred to remain in their rooms, staff sought their feedback on a one-to-one basis to ensure their views were included. Previous meeting discussions and actions taken were discussed in the meeting, demonstrating that feedback was listened to and acted upon. People were encouraged to contribute to decisions about the home, including menu choices, activities and other aspects of daily life.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to access healthcare services when needed, including GPs, district nurses, speech and language therapists, and a visiting chiropodist. Staff supported people to attend planned appointments and seek medical assistance in emergencies when required.

Consideration had also been given to the environment to support people, including those living with dementia. The service used colour-coded areas and LED lighting within corridors to aid orientation and make different parts of the home more easily recognisable. People's bedroom doors displayed photographs to help them identify their rooms and promote independence when moving around the service.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The provider met equality and human rights requirements. Staff received equality and diversity training, and care plans reflected individual needs, including any reasonable adjustments required. During the inspection we did not identify any concerns in relation to inequality or discrimination. The registered manager understood their responsibilities to promote equality.

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. People and their relatives were involved in discussions about end-of-life care. Where people wished to discuss their preferences, choices and wishes for end-of-life care were recorded within their care plans to help ensure these were understood and respected.