Brook House 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 that 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 remained Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff interactions were consistently kind, caring, and respectful. We observed warm and positive relationships between staff and people, including friendly conversation, laughter, and genuine engagement. People felt listened to, and staff communicated with them in a calm and respectful way. Care and treatment were delivered in line with people’s preferences and wishes. Staff were observed knocking before entering people’s rooms and maintaining privacy and dignity during personal care.

People were encouraged to express themselves, and staff responded patiently and sensitively, which helped build trusting relationships. Relatives spoke very positively about the care provided. One relative told us, “They are fantastic – very kind,” and another said, “They are lovely with her and they deal with things amazingly well.” Staff were attentive, calm, and gentle with everyone.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People were treated as individuals, and care was tailored to what mattered to them. Bedrooms were personalised, and people appeared comfortable and settled in their environment. One relative told us, “We are over the moon. They are so understanding. He has very severe dementia. They make him comfortable and safe, and he has a lovely room. They dressed his room with photos – he is a Chelsea fan.”

Care plans and risk assessments included information about people’s life histories, preferences, and how they wished to be supported. Staff knew people well, including their routines, hobbies, likes, and dislikes, and adapted care to reflect this. Relatives confirmed that staff took the time to understand people and adjust care accordingly. One relative told us, “They have got to know his likes and his dislikes in a short space of time.”

Activities were meaningful and well received, supporting people’s wellbeing and individuality. We observed staff communicating in a patient, kind, and respectful way, which helped people feel valued, understood, and respected.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were supported to make choices and have control over their daily lives in a safe and supportive way. Staff showed a good understanding of people’s preferences and supported choice wherever possible, while managing risks appropriately.

For example, one person chose not to follow a modified diet recommended by the Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) team. Staff discussed this with the multidisciplinary team and the person’s family and agreed a plan that balanced managing risks while respecting the person’s wishes.

People were encouraged to take part in meaningful activities and hobbies that were important to them, if they wished. They were also able to choose the level of routine, structure, and independence that suited them. For example, one person preferred to stay in their room on some days, and staff respected this choice. Relatives confirmed that independence was promoted safely. One relative told us, “She is able to get around using a walking frame. They encourage her.”

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.Staff showed genuine care and concern for people’s wellbeing and responded to their needs in a kind and supportive way. They acted promptly to reduce avoidable discomfort, anxiety, or distress. For example, people with swallowing difficulties were referred to the Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) team without delay.

Staff were able to recognise when people became unwell and took appropriate action quickly. On the day of the inspection, staff responded promptly to a fall by completing an initial assessment, increasing monitoring, and informing the doctor. Hospital packs were prepared, readily available, and kept up to date, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of how to respond in urgent situations.

Relatives spoke positively about how staff responded when people needed urgent support. One relative told us, “It has been a bit up and down, but the nurses are brilliant. She did have a fall and I got a phone call. They called an ambulance, and she was taken into hospital and given a head scan.”

However, some delays in responding to call bells were noted. A relative told us, “I’m not aware that they are short staffed, but on the second floor the residents are quite poorly, and the buzzers are often going quite often.” A small number of staff also said that workload pressures sometimes affected response times. This was raised with the manager, who acknowledged the concern and confirmed that staffing levels would be reviewed and action taken to improve responsiveness.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff.

The provider showed a commitment to supporting staff wellbeing and creating a positive working environment, which helped staff deliver person-centred care. Regular staff meetings were held, and staff spoke positively about their roles and the people they supported.

However, supervision and appraisal records were not fully up to date. The provider acknowledged this shortfall and confirmed it had already been identified, with actions in progress to address the backlog and ensure all staff receive regular supervision and appraisal.

Staff described the service as a nice place to work and said they worked well together as a team. However, some staff said they felt stressed at times due to workload pressures and felt that additional staffing would be helpful. This concern had already been raised with the provider, who assured us that staffing levels would be reviewed.

Staff said they felt valued in their roles and highlighted open communication as a strength of the service. They told us they had opportunities to give feedback, raise concerns, and felt their views were listened to.