CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brentwood
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, infection control arrangements were in place and staffing levels were suitable.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection. The previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager had effective quality checks and action plans. People, relatives, staff and professionals were involved in giving feedback and improving the service.
What inspectors found, March 2024
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care and strong management, but this inspection only reviewed Safe and Well-led.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 December 2023 and 10 February 2024. One inspector spoke with the registered manager, two staff members and two relatives. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough trained staff. They also found effective audits, open management and positive relationships with people, relatives and other professionals.
This was a focused inspection because the previous rating was from 2018. Only Safe and Well-led were reviewed in detail. The other key question ratings were not reassessed and the previous ratings were used to calculate the overall Good rating.
Personalised risk planning
Care records were detailed and tailored to each person. They included risk assessments and guidance on using the least restrictive approach.
“Care files were extremely detailed and person-centred, they contained a range of personalised risk assessments, which reflected the care and support needs of each individual.” from the report
Safe medicines
The manager checked medicines regularly. Staff had training and regular competency assessments.
“The manager carried out regular checks on people's medicines to make sure they were being administered in line with national best practice, the provider's policy and prescribing instructions.” from the report
Staffing and recruitment
The home had enough staff and completed key pre-employment checks. The training record showed full compliance across the modules reviewed.
“The providers training matrix showed 100% compliance across modules including health and safety, equality and diversity and deprivation of liberty safeguarding.” from the report
Quality management
The manager used audits and action plans to monitor care and identify improvements. Significant events were reported to the CQC.
“Audits and action plans were used effectively as a tool for continuous improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What was the previous rating for Caring, Effective and Responsive, and what has changed since that inspection?
- 02How will you assess and update my relative's personalised risk assessments and positive behaviour support plan?
- 03How are staff trained and checked as competent to administer my relative's medicines?
- 04How do you make sure there are enough appropriately trained staff for my relative's support needs?
- 05How can my relative and our family give feedback and see what action has been taken?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key question ratings from the previous inspection were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 March 2024 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Brentwood was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with a medicines-record issue identified and addressed.
The announced inspection took place on 1 February 2018. One inspector reviewed information held by the CQC, spoke with relatives, managers and care staff, observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicine and management records.
The home supports up to four younger adults with autism or learning disabilities. Four people were living there at the time. Inspectors found suitable staffing, thorough risk assessments, trained staff and safe medicine arrangements, although some information about as-needed and skin-applied medicines was not kept alongside the main medicine records.
People were treated with respect and supported to make choices. Care plans were detailed and personal, daily records had improved since the last inspection, and people were supported to take part in activities and use local community services.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home was also rated Good at the December 2015 inspection, so the overall rating remained Good.
Safe recruitment
Recruitment included the required checks before staff started work. Staffing levels were matched to people's needs and supported access to community activities.
“Staff recruitment procedures were robust and included Disclosure and Barring Service checks and references.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's preferences, communication methods and daily support needs in detail. They were reviewed to keep information up to date.
“Care plans were personalised and contained in-depth information to cover every aspect of the person's daily needs.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were supported to take part in a varied range of activities, including education, leisure and local community outings.
“People were supported and encouraged to access a range of activities both in an out of the home.” from the report
Improvement monitoring
Senior managers carried out regular checks, and actions from audits were followed up. Incidents were reviewed so lessons could be shared with staff.
“The provider had a quality assurance process in place which included regular visits from senior managers.” from the report
Medicine information was not together
needs fixingInformation about as-needed and topical medicines was not kept alongside the main medicine administration records, so it was not readily accessible to staff. The manager took action during and after the inspection to provide the missing documents.
“We found the information relating to 'as and when' medicines was not held alongside the actual MAR therefore not readily accessible to staff.” from the report
- 01Can you show us where the current instructions for as-needed medicines are kept?
- 02How are topical medicine instructions and records checked now?
- 03How will you make sure our relative's care plan reflects their communication methods, preferences and daily needs?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for our relative?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and raising concerns?
This was an announced inspection covering all five key questions, and inspectors reviewed care records for two people, medicine records for two people and records about how the home was managed. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 March 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Brentwood
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 May 2013.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Sunderland
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £950 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.