We carried out a review of the data available to us about Brooklands House Rest Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Brooklands House Rest Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had dedicated staff to ensure people were admitted safely and continued to be supported in the service in accordance with national guidance. Infection prevention and control (IPC) policies and procedures were kept under review. We found safe processes were in place and appropriate action had been taken. The local commissioner’s IPC team was providing advice and support when required.
Social media systems such as mobile phones and computer systems were used to facilitate contact between people and their relatives. One person said, “The staff are great and make sure visits are done and encourage us to keep in touch with relatives and friends.” The registered manager was facilitating safe visiting in line with government guidance. The provider was facilitating safe visiting in line with government guidance. Indoor visiting was suspended during the COVID-19 outbreak other than in exceptional circumstances; essential care givers were able to continue to visit indoors
During our visit we observed the staff using Personal Protective Equipment, (PPE) safely. The registered manager told us sufficient stocks of PPE were available and we confirmed this on the visit. A staff member said, “No shortage of PPE here from the start.”
People living at Brooklands House and staff were tested regularly for COVID-19. There were no staff employed who had not been vaccinated.
The home was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place and PPE stations placed around the home. There were designated domestic staff and cleaning schedules were followed. The registered manager carried out regular checks of the environment and cleanliness and any issues were being acted on. Comments about the cleanliness of the building were positive and they included from people, “Lovely clean home.”
We found the following examples of good practice.
Visitors were required to follow best practice guidance and wear appropriate PPE. Their visiting policies had been discussed with staff and relatives and agreed.
The service had dedicated staff to ensure people were received safely and continued to be supported in the service in accordance with national guidance. They supported people and their relatives to understand the policies and procedures surrounding protection against coronavirus, the isolation processes and how the service could help to alleviate them. For example feeling lonely, such as video calls with friends and loved ones and dedicated support time from staff members.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Brooklands House Rest Home is a large detached residential home situated in an area of Lytham St Annes overlooking parkland. At the time of our inspection visit, there were 29 people living at Brooklands House Rest Home they are registered for 30 people. The home is situated on three floors accessed by a passenger lift and stairs. There are a range of aids and adaptations in place to meet the needs of people who lived there.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Brooklands House Rest Home was praised by people they cared for, relatives and by visiting professionals. People spoke extremely positively about ways in which the quality of their life had impacted on them and how well they were supported. All comments from people told us staff were extremely caring and made a real difference to their quality of life. They told us their work ethic and dedication has impacted on their life at Brooklands House Rest Home. This was in terms of confidence, wellbeing and their independence.
Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. People told us they felt safe when supported by staff. Staffing levels were sufficient. We confirmed this by our observations and discussions with people. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and we saw safeguarding training was provided. The service managed people’s medicines safely. The provider ensured safety checks of the home environment were completed regularly.
The management team ensured staff received an effective induction and training programme, staff confirmed this. People spoke positively about the quality of meals provided and praised the cooks. Staff ensured people received support with their healthcare 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.
People told us staff knew them well and provided care that reflected their needs and choices. Activities were varied, and people told us there were trips and entertainment regularly provided. Staff offered people choices and encouraged them to make decisions about their care. No formal complaints had been received by the service since the last inspection.
The management team were clear about their roles and obligations to people and provided care which resulted in good outcomes for people. They worked in partnership with a variety of agencies to ensure people’s health and social needs were met. The service used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service on a regular basis.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at the last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 17 January 2017)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating
Follow up: The next scheduled inspection will be in keeping with the overall rating. We will continue to monitor information we receive from and about the service. We may inspect sooner if we receive concerning information about the service.
Brooklands House Rest Home is a large detached residential home situated in an area of Lytham St Annes overlooking parkland. At the time of our inspection visit, there were 26 people at Brooklands House Rest Home who required accommodation with nursing or personal care. The home is situated on three floors accessed by a passenger lift and stairs. There are a range of aids and adaptations in place to meet the needs of people who lived there. There are outdoor seating areas to the front and rear of the home.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At the last inspection on 27 October 2014, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements with regard to assessing and monitoring the quality of the service, consent to care and notifications. These actions have been completed.
During this inspection, we received comments that demonstrated people were extremely satisfied with their care. The management and staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They were committed to providing an outstanding standard of care and support to people who lived at the home.
People, their relatives and health professionals consistently told us the care delivered was exceptional. We were told repeatedly during this inspection people felt the support from the registered manager and staff was extremely caring and their dignity and privacy were respected at all times. Staff spoke fondly of people they cared for. It was evident people mattered and staff had developed exceptionally positive, kind, and compassionate relationships with the people they supported. A regular visitor told us, “I see what goes on here, as far as I am concerned the care is excellent.”
Records we looked at indicated staff had received abuse training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care or abusive practices related to the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. Staff we spoke with told us they were aware of the safeguarding procedure and knew what to do should they witness any abusive actions at the rest home.
The provider had recruitment and selection procedures to minimise the risk of inappropriate employees working with vulnerable people. Checks had been completed prior to any staff commencing work at the home. This was confirmed from discussions with staff.
We found staffing levels were suitable with an appropriate skill mix to meet the needs of people who lived at the home.
Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines were trained to ensure they were competent and had the skills required. Medicines were safely kept and appropriate arrangements for storing medicines were in place.
Staff received training related to their role and were knowledgeable about their responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs.
People and their representatives told us they were involved in their care and had discussed and consented to their care. We found staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People who were able told us they were happy with the variety and choice of meals available to them. We saw regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration.
We found people had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs were met. We saw the management team had responded promptly when people had experienced health problems.
Care plans were organised and had identified the care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received. They had been kept under review and updated when necessary to reflect people’s changing needs.
People told us they were happy with the activities organised at Brooklands House Rest Home. The activities were arranged for individuals and for groups.
The provider had liaised with the local hospice and ensured staff were trained to provide end of life care that was caring and dignified. Additional training from the hospice guided staff how to listen and how to respond in a way that empowered the person.
A complaints procedure was available and people we spoke with said they knew how to complain. People and staff spoken with felt the registered manager was accessible, supportive and approachable.
The registered manager had sought feedback from people who lived at the home and staff. They had consulted with people and their relatives for input on how the rest home could continually improve. The provider had regularly completed a range of audits to maintain people’s safety and welfare.
This unannounced inspection took place on 27 October 2014.
Brooklands House Rest Home is run by Mr. Patrick Joseph Gilligan and Mrs. Carol Josephine Gilligan. There was a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We last inspected this service on 09 May 2013 and the home was found to be meeting all of the essential standards that we assessed.
Brooklands House Rest Home is a large detached residential home situated in a residential area of Lytham overlooking parkland. The home is situated on three floors accessed by a passenger lift and stairs. There are outdoor seating areas to the front and rear of the home. The sea front is within easy walking distance and public transport links are nearby. The home can cater for up to 30 people.
During this inspection we found the service had a locked front door, and people’s capacity to leave the building without asking the staff for help, had not been fully assessed in order to determine if their freedom to leave the building was not unfairly restricted.
This was a breach of Regulation 18 HSCA 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. In order to ensure the service complies with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, a registered person must ensure suitable arrangements are in place for obtaining, and acting in accordance with, the consent of people in relation to the care and treatment provided for them.
We found that more robust quality assurance and, where appropriate, governance systems were needed as audits and periodic checks on systems operated within the home were not frequently being made. The service provider did not have a system in place to analyse incidents and accidents such as falls and hospital admissions. Establishing such a system would assist the service provider to understand why incidents took place, and then put measures in place to minimise or eliminate the risks associated with providing care and support.
This was a breach of Regulation 10 HSCA 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. The registered person must protect people against the risks of inappropriate or unsafe care and treatment, by means of the effective operation of systems designed to identify, assess and manage risks relating to the health, welfare and safety, and the analysis of incidents that resulted in, or had the potential to result in harm.
This was a breach of Regulation 18 HSCA 2008 (Registration) Regulations 2009. We found that the service provider had not notified the Commission of a recent hospital admission where a resident had undergone treatment from healthcare staff. The registered person must notify the Commission without delay of all relevant incidents such as hospital admissions and incidents where residents require treatment from a healthcare professional.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full report.
People were supported to understand what keeping safe meant and were encouraged to raise any concerns they may have about this. Staff at the service understood that people's safety had to be balanced with people’s right to make choices and to take risks. However, people’s freedom to leave the home was potentially restricted. Staff recognised the important role that safeguarding people from abuse had in enabling people to live a positive life. The care and support offered to people at the home was personalised and put the person at the centre in identifying their needs and choices.
People received their medicines as prescribed, because they were stored, administered and disposed of safely, in line with current and relevant regulations and guidance.
Staff were provided with effective support and training. People told us they had enough to eat and drink throughout the day, and at night if required.
People were seen to be cared for in ways that suited them. We saw that people were given opportunities to inform staff of their personal support requirements. Staff were involved in assessing people's needs, and there were systems in place to monitor how those needs were met. One person told us, 'It's been a stressful time for me, but staff have been wonderful. They have helped me settle in'.
We observed some of the staff working alongside people in positive ways. This included, sitting with residents and helping them to carry out tasks, including crossword puzzles and talking with people on a one to one basis.
People living at the home told us that they felt safe. One person said that staff were always there when you needed them. Another person told us, "It is always the same, very relaxed with staff around.'
People living at the home told us staff were respectful and treated them with dignity, one person said, "I can only say, they are very caring and have all the time in the world for us,' another said, "The staff are always around when you need them.' All the people we spoke to said good things about the way they were treated by all members of staff.
When asked, one person we spoke with said, "I feel safe and comfortable living here.' A relative told us that they felt their relative was, "Getting all the care they needed.'
Responses from staff and residents were all very positive and reflected how the home is run in the best interest of the people who live there. Other comments from people included, "I like the way I can do all the things I want to do and they encourage it.' Also, 'It's just a lovely place to live, I like my room and the staff are very caring.'