Brookfield House Care Home

There were enough staff to respond to people's needs. Several new staff had been recruited which meant there was a permanent staff team, who had been safely recruited. Staff managed the safety of the environment and equipment through checks and actions to minimise risk. The provider was in the process of arranging refurbishment works including a new shower room, due to start within the next few weeks. The home was clean and infection prevention and control measures were in place.

Medicines were safely managed, and people were supported by staff who received appropriate training and supervision.

People's nutritional needs were met. However, we noted records in some cases had not been updated, this was addressed straight away. Staff were responsive to any changes in their health needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We noted that records could be more detailed in relation to some best interest decisions.

There was a homely and friendly atmosphere. Staff were caring, knew people well and had built effective relationships. People were treated as individuals and staff respected their preferred lifestyle choices. The management team promoted a culture which respected people's privacy and dignity.

Staff had access to people's electronic care plans, which contained person-centred information about their needs and overall were kept up to date. People were supported to take part in activities and were able to maintain relationships with those important to them. There was an activity coordinator, who was due to increase the time spent in that role to focus on activities. The service had received positive feedback about the support they had provided to people at the end of life.

People knew how to complain should they need to and felt managers would be responsive.

The service was well-led. Managers engaged well with people, visitors and staff. There was a focus on

person-centred care and continuous improvements. The provider had effective governance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. The service worked in partnership with others.