CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brooke House
Not yet rated: the CQC has not published a rated inspection for this home, which is usual for a new registration.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and learning processes still being improved.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 5 and 6 September 2018. They observed care, spoke with people, staff and relatives, and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported to manage risks, and given safe medicines support. Staff were trained, kind and familiar with people's needs.
People were supported to build independence, take part in activities, work towards personal goals and make choices. The registered manager had left shortly before the inspection, but interim arrangements and support from the deputy manager and quality improvement lead were in place.
Safe, individual risk support
Staff understood people's risks and supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People were helped to manage their own medicines where it was safe for them to do so.
“People's risks were assessed and well understood by the staff involved in their care.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and respected their privacy, choices, personal histories and individuality.
“Staff took the time to get to know people's personal histories, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Building independence
People were supported to learn life skills, prepare food, manage money, volunteer, work and plan for greater independence.
“People's care and support plans aimed to develop skills and independence to help them meet their goals.” from the report
Personal communication
The home adapted communication to people's needs, including easy-read plans, Makaton signs and support in a person's native language.
“Staff used different methods to communicate with people and wrote care plans in ways people could understand.” from the report
Quality improvement
Managers used audits and a single action plan to identify and track areas for development. Staff and people were involved in improving the service.
“The provider had a good system of quality assurance and improvement in place.” from the report
Staff employment records
needs fixingThere was not always clear documentation of staff employment history. The recruiting manager had taken steps to make sure suitable staff were employed.
“There was a lack of clarity in documentation of employment history of staff” from the report
Learning from incidents
minorThe home was still improving how it recorded and shared learning from incidents. This could affect how clearly improvements are tracked.
“The service was working to improve the way they shared learning from incidents and the way this was documented to better improve quality of care.” from the report
Management change
minorThe registered manager had left shortly before the inspection. One relative was unsure what communication and support they would receive, although the home agreed to create a communication plan.
“They were unsure what communication and support they would receive” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and how has the management arrangement changed since the registered manager left?
- 02How do you now record and check each staff member's full employment history?
- 03What changes have you made to share learning from incidents and record the actions taken?
- 04How will you keep relatives informed when a person sometimes consents to information being shared and sometimes does not?
- 05How will you support my relative's goals for independence, work, activities and managing their own medicines?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; inspectors reviewed records for two people, two medicines records and two staff recruitment files. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 October 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 Brooke House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 January 2011.
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 Southampton
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 £980 to £1,350 a week. 39 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.