CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brook House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, arranging testing, following social distancing rules and keeping its infection control policy up to date.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Brook House Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 February 2021. It looked at how the home was preventing and controlling infections, particularly COVID-19.
Inspectors found that staff had current infection control training, enough protective equipment and used it correctly. The home had testing, health checks, regular cleaning and an up-to-date infection control policy.
The home had arrangements for window and in-person visits, including visits for people receiving end-of-life care. It also provided video and telephone calls so people could keep in touch with family.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives evidence about infection control, but it is not an overall judgement about the quality of care.
Staff training and protective equipment
Staff had current infection control training, enough protective equipment and used it correctly.
“Staff had up-to-date training about infection prevention and control (IPC), they had enough personal protective equipment (PPE) and we saw they wore this correctly.” from the report
Testing and safety checks
The home had regular COVID-19 testing and checks for symptoms before people entered or worked there.
“Systems were in place that promoted people's and staff's safety such as regular tests for COVID-19, completing a health questionnaire and being symptom free.” from the report
Keeping in touch with family
The home supported window visits, some in-person visits and contact by video, telephone and social media.
“Various changes relating to COVID-19 and the way people kept in touch with family members had been implemented including facilities for video and telephone calls and the use of social media.” from the report
Cleaning and outbreak planning
Inspectors saw regular cleaning of frequently touched surfaces. The home also had plans to separate areas and staff if an outbreak occurred.
“There were plans and facilities in place to manage any future potential COVID-19 outbreaks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 23 February 2021?
- 02What are the current rules for family visits, including visits for people receiving end-of-life care?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and what happens when someone has symptoms?
- 04How would you separate parts of the home and staff teams if there were an infection outbreak?
- 05How do you check that staff continue to use protective equipment correctly?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and it did not provide an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 2021 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 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but infection control practices were not always followed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 24 February 2020. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, personalised care and respectful support. People were involved in decisions and staff worked with health professionals.
There were some areas to improve. Staff did not always follow infection control training, including when handling waste. The home was also waiting for a new activities co-ordinator, and the manager identified that activity information in the dementia area should be easier to understand.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs in a timely way. Staffing was increased when people's needs became more complex.
“We saw there were enough staff to meet people's needs in a timely manner.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff training and yearly checks were used to assess competence.
“Staff stored, administered and disposed of people's medicines safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported them with kindness, privacy, dignity and independence. Relatives said they were involved in care discussions.
“People and their relatives told us staff were caring.” from the report
Good health support
Staff worked with GPs, dentists, therapists, nurses and other professionals to support people's health and wellbeing.
“Staff supported people to have access to health professionals such as GP's, private dentists, speech and language therapists and community psychiatric nurses to promote their well-being.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff could give feedback. Audits and visits from the provider's quality team were used to identify and monitor improvements.
“Processes to assess and check the quality and safety of the service were completed.” from the report
Infection control practice
needs fixingStaff had infection control training but did not always follow it. Inspectors saw waste being carried without gloves, as well as a broken pedal bin and personal toiletry items in a communal bathroom.
“However, we saw in a communal bathroom some personal toiletry items including disposable razors and a pedal bin that was broken.” from the report
Activities arrangements
minorThe home was waiting for a new activities co-ordinator. Activities were taking place, but the manager said information about them in the dementia area needed to be clearer and more pictorial.
“Brook House Care Home was currently awaiting their new activities co-ordinator to start work.” from the report
Food consistency
minorMost people and relatives spoke positively about the food, but one person said its quality was inconsistent.
“The food here is a bit hit and miss.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made since the inspection to ensure staff always follow infection control procedures?
- 02Is the activities co-ordinator now in post, and what activities are available for people living with dementia?
- 03How do you explain upcoming activities in a way that people with dementia can understand?
- 04How do you check that food is consistently good and meets people's choices and dietary needs?
- 05How are relatives involved in reviewing and changing a person's care plan?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the report says all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 2020 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 Brook House Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 November 2010.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,020 to £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.