CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Brookhaven
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, recruitment, medicines, infection control and accident reporting were found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before placement and care was delivered with support from health and social care professionals. Staff were trained, supervised and described as competent.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in planning their care and supported to make choices and remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care and activities were highly personalised. The Recovery Star model helped people set goals, make decisions and develop skills for independent living.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Leadership and governance were described as exceptional. People and staff helped shape improvements through champion groups, meetings, feedback and action plans.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found kind, safe care, with especially strong personalised support and leadership.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 14 March 2019. They reviewed care and staff records, safety checks, audits and training. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and community professionals, and observed how staff supported people.
The home provided mental health rehabilitation and recovery care for up to 22 adults. Inspectors found detailed, personalised support plans and strong evidence that people were making progress towards their own recovery goals. People had choice over their daily lives and activities, and were supported to build skills for more independent living.
The overall rating was Outstanding. Safe, Effective and Caring were rated Good. Responsive and Well-led improved from Good at the previous inspection in September 2016 to Outstanding. The report says legal requirements were met.
Personalised recovery plans
Support plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People planned their own recovery and their progress was recorded.
“Support plans were very detailed person-centred documents. They reflected people's assessed needs extremely well and had been consistently reviewed.” from the report
Kind staff
Inspectors saw respectful and caring interactions. People and relatives gave very positive feedback about staff.
“We saw some lovely interactions between staff and those who lived at the home. We were told and our observations confirmed care workers were kind and caring.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you use the Recovery Star model to set and review my relative's own goals?
- 02How would you support my relative to move between the three levels of medicines support as their independence changes?
- 03What training and supervision have staff received for the mental health needs of people living here?
- 04How can my family member and relatives take part in meetings, feedback and decisions about the service?
- 05What activities, work opportunities and practical life-skills support would be available for my relative?
This was an unannounced scheduled inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises; the previous overall rating was Good on 16 September 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 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.
What inspectors found, September 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements made since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited on 22 and 23 August 2016. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with eight people living in the home, staff, the manager and other professionals. They also checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe, were treated with kindness and were involved in decisions about their care. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable medicines systems, staff training and access to health professionals.
The previous inspection in June 2015 had found problems with cleanliness, risk assessments, safe care and treatment, and dignity. The home had sent an action plan, and inspectors found the required improvements had been made during this inspection.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and saw staff respond promptly to people's needs. Recruitment checks, safeguarding procedures and risk management were in place.
“There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines records were organised, complete and up to date. Controlled medicines were checked accurately.
“All records seen were complete and up to date.” from the report
Dignity and independence
People had more freedom to move around the home, use shared areas and access the secure garden. Staff respected privacy and personal choices.
“Staff respected people's rights to privacy, dignity and independence.” from the report
Recovery support
People were supported with personal goals through individual plans, therapy, activities and a rehabilitation programme. Their progress was reviewed regularly.
“People had the opportunity to participate in a range of appropriate activities, as well as group and individual therapy sessions.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, meetings, surveys and action plans to check the service and make improvements. People were asked for their views.
“There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, which included regular audits and feedback from people living in the home.” from the report
One incomplete recruitment record
needs fixingOne new staff member's record did not include a full employment history. The manager obtained the missing information and revised the recruitment procedure after the inspection.
“We noted from looking at one new staff member's recruitment records that they had not included a full history of employment.” from the report
- 01How does the recovery and rehabilitation programme match my relative's current needs and goals?
- 02How will you support my relative to increase their independence and prepare for life after the home?
- 03How are individual risk assessments reviewed when my relative's mental or physical health changes?
- 04What support is available if my relative wants to work towards managing their own medicines?
- 05How can families raise concerns, and how will the home keep them informed about the response?
This was a planned inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions, with the first day unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 September 2016 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 Brookhaven
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Outstanding.
- May 2019Outstandingcurrent ratingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 February 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.