Brook Lodge

Updated 23 December 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act.

This was a targeted inspection to check on a specific concern we had about the management of choking risks for people living with swallowing difficulties.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

Service and service type

Brook Lodge is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was to make arrangements to carry out staff interviews virtually and to request documents relating to management of the service for review. This approach was to reduce risks in relation to COVID-19 as less time was needed on site.

Before the inspection

We reviewed all the information we had received about this service since the last inspection. This included information from the provider and feedback from a specialist healthcare professional who regularly worked with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with four members of care staff virtually and reviewed a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures. While on-site we spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and one care staff member. We reviewed a range of records. This included risk assessments, support plans and associated records for four people at risk of choking. We observed staff supporting people at risk of choking during lunch.

After the inspection

We spoke with two people's relatives. We looked at training data and quality assurance records and continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate the evidence found.

Updated 23 December 2020

About the service: Brook Lodge is a registered care home that provides accommodation and support for up to eight people living with learning disabilities. There were seven people living at the service when we visited.

The care service had been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

People’s experience of using this service:

People using the service were safe. The service had reflected on an incident and put measures in place to ensure any further risks were minimised. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and they felt confident in how to report these types of concerns. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be in a safe manner. There were sufficient staff with the proper skill mix on duty to support people with their needs and keep them safe. Effective and safe recruitment processes were consistently followed by the provider. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff had the right skills, experience and support to meet the needs of people who used the service. People were assisted to have a healthy and balanced diet with a choice of meals that they had chosen. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of people’s care and support. People were treated with dignity and respect and their independence was promoted.

Relatives and social and health care professionals gave feedback that evidenced people received responsive and person-centred care and support in all areas of their lives. A relative commented, “Overall, [person] has the best care he has ever received within the system, it is my fervent wish that he retains this high level of care.”

Staff had ensured people could maintain their interests and arranged activities in line with this. This ensured that individual preferences were explored and acted upon so people could live as full a life as possible.

Where people could not easily verbalise their needs, management and staff involved people’s family, friends and others that knew them well, so that care and support plans reflected people’s needs and aspirations. Care and support plans were reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed.

Staff respected people’s beliefs such as religion. People and family were encouraged to explore and record their wishes as part of their end of life care plan, including how their religious beliefs would be met.

People and staff felt supported by the registered manager. The provider had effective systems and processes in place to ensure the quality and safety of service.

Rating at last inspection: Good (Report published 20 December 2018)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. A focused inspection took place in November 2018 following concerns raised regarding the safety of people. We looked at two areas during that inspection, Safe and Well Led and found the registered manager had taken all appropriate action following the concerns raised and therefore people were protected, and the rating remained as Good.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk