CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Brookfields Private Nursing Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, safe visiting arrangements and well-organised staff.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors found the home calm and relaxed. Staff were well organised, responded promptly to people's needs and supported activities. They also found that visitors were checked safely, staff used protective equipment correctly and supplies were monitored.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or a full assessment of all five areas of care.
Calm and responsive care
The home was calm and relaxed. Staff were organised, responded promptly and helped people take part in activities.
“During our visit, the home was calm with a relaxed atmosphere, and staff were well organised.” from the report
Safe visiting
The home used temperature and symptom checks before entry and arranged visits at suitable times.
“The provider had acted to make sure people could have visitors safely.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff used the required protective equipment correctly, and the home had plentiful supplies that were monitored.
“We observed staff wearing the required PPE correctly whilst supporting people at the home.” from the report
Infection control measures
Inspectors were assured that the home had measures covering testing, hygiene, social distancing, outbreaks and its infection control policy.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures are currently in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 02How are visitors currently checked for symptoms and infection risks before entering?
- 03How are PPE supplies monitored, and what happens if supplies or staffing levels become tight?
- 04How are infection outbreaks prevented and managed now?
- 05When were the other areas of care, such as medicines, care planning and leadership, last fully assessed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide ratings for the other four questions or an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 2022 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, May 2019
Rated Good, with exceptionally strong leadership; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few records and training issues to check.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 26 February 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, managers and staff. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Inspectors found that people felt safe, received their medicines properly, had access to healthcare and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
Well-led was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found strong quality monitoring, good staff support, involvement from people and relatives, and a clear focus on improving people's lives. They also noted some people had waited a long time for call bells, some staff could not explain parts of their training, and some best-interests decisions were not recorded in enough detail.
Strong quality checks
The management team used detailed audits, feedback and information from outside organisations to monitor safety and improve care.
“There were excellent and detailed systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service being provided.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People consistently described staff as friendly, helpful and caring. Inspectors also saw a calm and reassuring approach.
“Everyone we spoke with praised the caring attitude of the staff, people commented how friendly and helpful they were, how well they communicated and chatted with people.” from the report
Personalised activities and support
Care and activities reflected people's preferences, abilities, backgrounds and interests. People were supported to remain as independent as possible.
“People received care based on their individual assessed needs.” from the report
Well-supported staff
Staff received regular supervision, training and opportunities to develop specialist knowledge. Inspectors found the staff team felt valued and supported.
“Staff told us they felt very well supported, nurtured and valued.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Medicines were administered according to the home's procedures. Staff training and competency checks were in place, including for medicines given when needed.
“People were provided with their medicines in a safe way.” from the report
Call bell response times
needs fixingPeople gave mixed views about how long they waited for help from their call bells. Inspectors found requests were responded to promptly overall, but this is worth checking for the person you are supporting.
“Sometimes I have to wait a long time.” from the report
Some training knowledge
needs fixingOne person felt dementia training and understanding of some conditions could be better. Inspectors also found some staff could not recall their mental capacity and safeguarding training clearly.
“However, some staff were unable to recall their training and explain how they would protect people” from the report
Best-interests records
needs fixingSome decisions made for people who lacked capacity were not documented in enough detail. The registered manager said these records would be reviewed.
“Some best interests' decisions were not documented in detail.” from the report
Food consistency
minorMost people thought the food was good and choices were available, but one person said the standard was variable. Ask how this has been monitored since the catering manager was appointed.
“The food is variable. I think the cook is being taught.” from the report
- 01How quickly are call bells answered now, and how do you monitor response times?
- 02What additional dementia, mental capacity and safeguarding training have staff received since the inspection?
- 03Have all best-interests decisions been reviewed and recorded in the required detail?
- 04How do you check that meals are consistent and meet each person's dietary, cultural and personal preferences?
- 05What were the 12 complaints made in the previous 12 months, and what changes resulted from them?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five rating areas, including the premises and the care provided; the previous overall rating was Good in May 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 May 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.
Every inspection of Brookfields Private Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Brookfields Private Nursing Home →
- May 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
Read what inspectors found at Brookfields Private Nursing Home →
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 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
78 live-in carers within about an hour of Derby
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 £1,260 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
“Rachel is a quietly spoken, extremely caring person and looked after Val very well.”
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.