Brenalwood 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.

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 71 (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. However, the daily records completed by staff did not always identify how people were presenting, which would help staff to monitor and identify any changes in people’s wellbeing.

People’s care plans had improved which identified the person centred support they required and preferred. However, there were some parts of the records which would benefit from additional information, such as whilst some people’s health conditions identified how these affected them, some did not. A person’s records stated in 1 part they had not been formally diagnosed with dementia, but in another part said they had been. The management team told us this would be addressed, and work was ongoing on the care plans.

People had access to activities to reduce the risks of boredom and isolation. This included planned and impromptu activities, which were quickly changed when people did not engage. There was still 1 activity coordinator employed, however, there was also enough care staff to spend time with people and do activities as people wanted them, such as board games. The registered manager told us how they read the newspaper with people and discussed the daily news with them. The management team told us how the care staff team were aware of their responsibilities in supporting people with their social needs as well as their physical needs. The management team said this would be continued when more people moved into the service, as staffing would be kept under review. Although this was a positive move forward, the daily notes did not always include these interactions or people’s presentation. The management team told us this was an ongoing improvement and had noted some staff were recording better than others and this would be addressed.

People looked well presented which demonstrated their personal care needs were being met.

Staff meeting minutes from September 2025 showed staff were advised to ensure people’s records reflected their person centred needs.

A member of staff showed us the information they had about how to meet people’s needs in their electronic handheld device, and how they documented how these needs were met.

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.

Since our last assessment, improvements had been made with people’s access to the community, including outings to garden centres and the sea front. A person told us, “Yesterday we went to the museum in Harwich… been to 2 garden centres.” Since our last assessment, there were push buttons in the shared areas with photographs of singing artists, when pressed, music played by the artist on the picture. We noted these were accessible to people and at a height they could reach if they used a wheelchair to mobilise. This demonstrated people’s diverse abilities had been considered when installing the equipment. A relative told us, “[Family member] loved Neil Diamond and [family member] loves pushing the music buttons.”

People’s care records included their diverse needs and how they were met. Staff training records showed staff had received training including equality and diversity, gender and sexual diversity, mental health and dementia.

We observed part of the handover meeting when the night staff finished their shift and handed over to the day staff any events that had happened during the night. This supported the day staff to be aware of people’s wellbeing and take any action if required.

A relative told us how they felt standards had improved, “The care is much better, [staff] have gelled together as a team.” They also commented on how they felt the reduction in the use of agency staff had improved the service and the permanent staff members, “Know my [family member] so well.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s care records included information about how they communicated and guidance for staff in how to effectively communicate with people. Where required, important information such as the complaints procedure and service user guide were provided in accessible formats, such as easy read.

Notice boards which included information about upcoming events, photographs from previous activities, what the management team had actioned as a result of people’s comments were accessible to people using the service, such as colourful, large print and at a height which could be seen by people, for example if they used a wheelchair to mobilise.

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.

There was a complaints procedure in place, which was followed where any complaints were received. The complaints procedure was available in accessible formats and was available in the service.

Since our last assessment the contact with people’s relatives had improved and they knew who the registered manager was and said they would raise concerns if they needed to. A relative told us, “I can speak with [registered manager] any time and any of the staff.”

Meetings were held attended by people using the service, where they could discuss the care they received. Notices advertised relative meetings and also stated to ask if they wanted to speak with the registered manager privately.

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

The registered manager told us they had positive relationship and worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people had access to services to receive the care they required. This was confirmed by people’s records which included support and guidance provided by external professionals who were involved in people’s care.

The registered manager told us about the actions they had taken to ensure a person using the service received the treatment they needed when the staff were concerned about their wellbeing, which had not been provided. This included working with the GP surgery who supported the service in gaining the emergency support required. This was confirmed by a relative who told us, “[Staff] called the doctor the next day as staff were not happy.”

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.

People’s care records included information about their history and diverse needs and how they were met. People’s preferences were documented regarding the care and support they received, including information from their relatives, where appropriate. The staff supported people to access services where required. Information was provided, for example to hospital staff, to ensure they were made aware of people’s diverse needs, including how they communicated and any support they required with eating. This ensured people received the care they received.

The registered manager told us they celebrated cultural festivals including Easter and Christmas, due to the people living in the service sharing a white British culture. However, other cultural celebrations were in place to support people enjoy them, a relative told us how Chinese New Year had been celebrated with Chinese food and people had made lanterns which were hung in the service. Monthly visits from a local place of worship were undertaken to support people’s spiritual needs.

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.

At our previous assessment of this service, we noted improvement had not been made from the inspection before that in how people’s decisions were sought and documented, should they become unwell or required end of life care. At this assessment we found improvement had been made. We reviewed 5 people’s care records and these included people’s wishes and decisions.

A recent staff meeting demonstrated staff were guided in end of life and palliative care and what this meant when they were providing care to people requiring this support. In addition, staff had received end of life training. The registered manager told us they had been offered additional face to face end of life training from a local hospice, and they were planning to accept this. Training records showed staff had received training in end of life care and death dying and bereavement.

Prior to our assessment, we received feedback from a relative of a person who had died in the service, they were complimentary about the care their family received, including their end of life care, the kindness of the staff and told us that a staff member had worked over their shift to support them and their family member.