Brookfield Residential Care Home Limited

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 68 (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.

Policies and procedures were provided to guide staff in equality, diversity and human rights, helping to promote good standards of care. Staff felt they were valued as a member of the team. We were told staff meetings were routinely held as well as daily handovers, helping to keep staff involved and informed about events within the service.

People were provided with clear information on how to raise suggestions and concerns about the service. People were encouraged to contribute and share ideas through resident meetings or individual discussions with staff.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the knowledge, skills and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered manager had recently resigned from the home. A new manager had been appointed and had commenced an application to register with the Care Quality Commission. People told us, “[Manager’s name] will make a great manager” and “There’s a better atmosphere around the home now.”

The provider and manager spoke daily and were clear about their role and responsibilities; both were actively involved and accessible to people using the service, staff and any visitors. One staff member told us, “There’s an open-door policy, I know I could go to [manager], and she would keep information confidential.

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

Systems were in place for people and staff to follow should they have any issues or concerns they wanted to report in confidence and anonymously.

Staff were aware of the whistle blowing policy and knew the procedure to follow. Staff said they would speak with the provider and manager about any issues and were confident they would be listened to, and any issues would be acted upon.

Staff told us, “Yes, I would feel comfortable raising concerns with [provider] and [manager]. An issue raised was taken seriously and investigated. I feel more confident things are being looked at and dealt with” and “You can’t fault either of them; you can approach them with any concerns or queries, always heard and listened to.”

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.

The team comprised of both male and female staff. Due to changes in the team staff had been working excessive hours, which had impacted on morale. This had been recognised by the provider; a review of staffing had been completed, and arrangements were being made to appoint additional staff to the team.

The service had an equality and diversity policy, which outlined the aims of the service, respecting and valuing difference, and promoting equality, diversity, and human rights.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They recognised these could be enhanced further providing more effective monitoring and oversight.

The provider acknowledged further improvements could be made to people’s care plans and risk assessments, recruitment records, staff training and development. The provider was responsive and proactive in taking steps to address the shortfalls identified during our visit, so people continued to receive safe and effective support.

The provider was regularly present in the home and was working closely with the new manager to develop the systems and process in place. One person we spoke with said, “Since the new management started, routines have got better, more structure.”

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

The provider worked collaboratively with other agencies to help identify and drive improvement in areas of care delivery, areas of health and safety and staff recruitment, training and development. Where shortfalls were identified they were proactive in taking prompt and immediate action to ensure good standards were maintained.

Systems and processes to support learning and drive improvement in people’s care were in place. The manager was new to post and was working with the provider to make further improvements, providing better monitoring as well as embedding good practices.

The provider acknowledged the shortfalls identified during this inspection. Immediate action was being taken in partnership with other agencies to address these areas.

Staff were able to share their ideas and felt informed and involved in addressing areas of learning and improvement. One staff member told us, “I’ve made suggestions and they’ve been well received by management and were looked into.”