CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Brookfield House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and there were systems to manage abuse, risks, staffing, medicines and the environment. Call bells were sometimes out of reach, fire drills did not always cover worst-case situations, and some infection control practices were not followed consistently.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received appropriate food, staff training and support with health needs. Some assessments, dietary records and records of best-interest decisions needed more detail or updating, and parts of the building looked tired.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as caring. Inspectors saw patient and kind support, respect for privacy and dignity, and attention to people's choices and preferred lifestyles.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans contained person-centred information and staff supported people's preferences, activities and relationships. The home had a complaints process and was reintroducing face-to-face reviews with relatives.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible, knew people well and supported staff. Quality checks were in place, feedback was gathered and the manager acted quickly on issues found during the inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some records and safety practices needing attention.
Inspectors visited without notice on 16, 17 and 20 January 2023. They spoke with 22 people living at the home, four relatives and 12 staff. They also observed care and meals and checked medicines, care plans, staff records and quality checks.
People and relatives were positive about the home. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, kind care and good support with food, health needs, activities and relationships. The home was clean and had a friendly, homely atmosphere.
There were some shortfalls. Call bells were not always within reach, some records were not fully updated or detailed, fire drills did not always cover the most difficult situations, and staff did not always follow some infection control guidance. The manager took action during or soon after the inspection.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first inspection of this newly registered service. The previous provider had also been rated Good in March 2020.
Kind, respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors saw staff being patient, kind and caring, while respecting people's privacy, dignity and choices.
“There was a homely and friendly atmosphere. Staff knew people well and had built effective relationships.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to respond to people's needs. Recent recruitment had created a permanent staff team and reduced reliance on agency workers.
“There were enough staff to respond to people's needs effectively.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked as competent to give medicines. Records showed that people received medicines at the right time, with guidance for medicines given when needed.
“Medicines administration records (MAR) indicated people received their medicines at the right time.” from the report
Good management
Managers were visible and approachable. The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and make improvements.
“The provider had effective governance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Call bells
needs fixingCall bells were not always left within people's reach. The manager reminded staff about this during the inspection.
“Where people used call bells to alert staff, on occasions staff had not left them within reach.” from the report
Incomplete records
needs fixingSome risk, assessment, dietary and best-interest records lacked detail or were not updated. The manager took action to correct the records.
“However, we noted records in some cases had not been updated, this was addressed straight away.” from the report
Fire safety planning
needs fixingFire drills had taken place but were not always planned regularly to include the most difficult situations. The manager changed the procedures straight away.
“Whilst fire drills had been carried out, these were not always regularly planned to include worst case scenarios.” from the report
Infection control practice
needs fixingStaff did not always follow guidance properly when removing gloves or wearing face masks. The report says the home was otherwise assured in several other infection control areas.
“We were somewhat assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Tired parts of the building
minorSome areas needed redecoration. Refurbishment, including a new shower room, was being arranged and was due to start within the following weeks.
“However, aspects of the building looked tired and in need of redecoration.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every person's call bell is within reach at all times?
- 02What changes have you made to fire drills, and how often do you practise the most difficult evacuation situations?
- 03How do you check that care assessments, dietary guidance and best-interest decisions are complete and up to date?
- 04What steps have staff taken to follow guidance on removing gloves and wearing face masks?
- 05Has the planned refurbishment, including the new shower room, been completed?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered service and covered all five rating areas, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 2023 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 February 2021. It looked at how well the home was prepared to prevent and control infection during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found the home was clean and hygienic. They were assured about testing, vaccinations, self-isolation, personal protective equipment, staff training, visiting arrangements, social distancing and infection control policies.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives no overall rating and does not provide ratings for most areas of care. It is not a full assessment of the quality of care in all areas.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with schedules for frequent cleaning.
“The home was clean and hygienic. There were schedules in place to ensure frequent cleaning took place.” from the report
Protective equipment and training
Staff had enough masks, gloves and aprons, and had received training and support to help control infection.
“All staff had received sufficient training and support to prevent and control the spread of infection.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
People living at the home and staff were supported to take part in regular testing and had access to vaccination.
“People living at the home and staff were supported to take part in regular testing and had access to the vaccination programme.” from the report
Family visits
The home had individual visiting risk assessments and arrangements to help people keep in contact with family.
“Safe arrangements were in place to enable people to have contact with their family.” from the report
Infection control planning
The home had COVID-19 policies and assessments to guide staff in reducing the risk of infection spreading.
“There were COVID-19 specific policies and assessment in place, which meant staff were guided to take appropriate actions to reduce the risk of transmission.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are regular testing and vaccination arrangements being managed now?
- 02How do you assess and manage the risks of visits by family members?
- 03How do you make sure staff continue to use personal protective equipment safely?
- 04How often are communal areas and other parts of the home cleaned, and how is this recorded?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for preventing and managing infection outbreaks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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.
Every inspection of Brookfield House Care Home
7 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2016InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- May 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 May 2020.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Cheshire East
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 £1,260 a week. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during 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.