Brookfield Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-Led - this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care, supported learning and innovation, and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was well managed and well-led. Leaders were working hard to improve the culture within the service to promote high-quality, person-centred care.

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 had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The manager told us they had worked to improve the culture at the service, to ensure people they supported were at the centre of care and support. New care staff felt they could bring their previous care experience to help support the management team in improving the care provision for people. Staff confirmed they were listened to when suggestions were made. All staff we spoke with told us they enjoyed working at Brookfield.

Brookfield had a manager and staff who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. The manager had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People and relatives were positive about the manager of the service. All people told us the manager was capable and inclusive. One person said, “[Name] comes round every morning. If there any problems I tell them. If you want to talk to her, you can.” There was a deputy manager in place and the management team had evaluated issues at the service and were driving improvements. There was a culture of support being provided to the senior team and all staff working at the service. All staff had clearly identified roles and accountability.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Staff we spoke to told us they were able to speak up freely and were provided with various avenues to do this. Clear information and guidance around processes and next steps were made available to all staff. All staff we spoke with were aware of the providers whistle blowing policy. All staff felt confident action would be taken where concerns were raised. Processes were in place to enable people and staff to speak up.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff told us they felt valued and respected one another. They told us they felt supported by the team and reflected on improvements in staff morale. Staff told us they were supported and had regular team meetings and supervisions. Staff also told us managers were visible and had good oversight of the team. For example, 1 staff member told us, 'We have staff meetings, and we are notified in advance of these, and the minutes are put on the staff board. This keeps us up to date.”

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

At the last inspection we found a lack of systems to assess and mitigate risks to the health, safety and wellbeing of people. At this visit we found there were adequate systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service.

The manager carried out routine audits on care plans, incidents and accidents and spot checks on staff performance, and cleanliness. Where shortfalls were identified, prompt actions were taken to address this. The manager had developed the audit system sharing some areas with the deputy for example weekly medicine audits.

Statutory notifications were submitted and safeguarding alerts raised to the local authority where necessary. We found the leadership team open and honest about the challenges they had faced, and they demonstrated a commitment to provide a quality service for people who were using their service.

The manager sent requested items and action plans to us in a timely manner giving them and us assurance about improvements.

Staff feedback was positive about the manager and deputy manager and the support they received to do their job effectively. One member of staff said, “[Managers name] has been good to me, asks me how I am doing.” The deputy manager told us they spent time working with the staff to support people by leading by example, to help continue to drive improvement.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

Staff worked with partners to provide good outcomes for people. We received some feedback from partners about how the service collaborated with them and positive feedback about the care people received. One professional said, “We have a good working relationship with the service, they are very open and transparent.” People were happy living at the service and relatives were happy with the support their family members received. One person said, “It’s lovely living here, everybody’s friendly. I’ve enjoyed it and I’ve lived here quite a few years.”

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement between themselves and with the local system.

Systems in place ensured the service learned lessons from accidents and incidents. Refurbishments in the service were ongoing. Improvement plans were in place and ongoing.