CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Brookfield
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Brookfield was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed care, with Outstanding support for activities and personal interests.
Inspectors carried out an unannounced visit on 1 October 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management records, and looked around the home.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines, suitable care planning, kind staff and effective management systems.
Responsive care was rated Outstanding. The home worked hard to understand people's histories, interests and relationships. It provided varied activities, supported links with the local community and helped people maintain meaningful relationships.
The overall rating stayed Good, the same as at the previous inspection. The Responsive rating improved from Good to Outstanding.
Personal interests and activities
The home made strong efforts to discover people's past interests and create activities around them. People had a wide choice of inclusive activities and community links.
“People had excellent opportunities and access to a variety of activities to prevent social isolation.” from the report
Relationships and independence
Staff supported people to maintain important relationships and to have private time. They also helped people regain independence and continue meaningful activities outside the home.
“The service made every effort to encourage and support people to develop and maintain relationships with people that matter to them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and responded sensitively to distress, particularly for people living with complex dementia needs.
“On the day of the inspection, we saw interactions were kind and empathetic.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were given as prescribed, and records were accurate.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs. We saw people were attended to in a timely manner and staff were not rushed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you find out about my relative's past interests and use them to plan meaningful activities?
- 02How would you support my relative to maintain important relationships and have privacy when visitors come?
- 03How would you assess and update my relative's risks, care plan and medicine needs?
- 04What training and supervision would the staff caring for my relative receive?
- 05How would you support my relative's communication, nutrition and contact with health professionals?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions; the overall rating was Good, and the previous Good rating for Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 November 2019 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, April 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with previous medicines and consent problems significantly improved.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 8 March 2017. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, staff records and management records, and observed care.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People received their medicines as prescribed, had enough food and drink, and were supported by staff who understood their needs.
At the previous inspection, the home had breached rules about medicines and the Mental Capacity Act. Inspectors found significant improvements and said the actions in the home's improvement plan had been completed.
There was no registered manager at the time. The home was in the final stages of recruiting to this position, while a senior area manager was managing the home five days a week.
Medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed. Records were accurate, staff checked people's identity and medicines were stored safely.
“At this inspection we found that people received their medicine as prescribed and the service had safe medicine administration systems in place.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking kindly, respecting privacy and dignity, and giving people time and reassurance.
“Throughout our visit we saw people were treated in a caring and kind way.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's histories, preferences and communication needs. Care plans were updated when people's needs changed.
“Care plans contained details of people's preferences, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The home used audits, complaints, accidents and incidents to identify improvements. Inspectors found that actions from the previous inspection had been completed.
“During our inspection we saw that the actions in the plan had been completed.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home did not have a registered manager during the inspection. Recruitment was in its final stages, but the family should check whether this has since been resolved.
“The service did not have a registered manager.” from the report
Mixed views about staffing
minorSome staff and relatives said staffing could sometimes be tight, especially for personal care. Inspectors observed enough staff on the day and found that people's needs were met.
“There are times when we don't have enough staff but rarely use agency.” from the report
- 01Has the home now appointed and registered a manager with the CQC?
- 02How do you check that staffing is sufficient during busy periods and for personal care?
- 03How are medicines checked and audited now, following the previous medicines breach?
- 04How will you involve my relative and family in mental capacity and best-interest decisions?
- 05What activities are available for people who prefer to stay in their rooms?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing whether the previous improvement actions had been completed. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 2017 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
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 November 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Oxfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.