Brewster House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Staff were kind and caring; however, people’s dignity and privacy were not always respected. Staff supported people to maintain their independence; however, people’s individual preferences for their care had not always been considered when providing support.

This service scored 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the caring attitude of staff. Comments included, "I like the staff here, they're very friendly and seem to care for [person] well", "They are very caring and kind and make me feel welcome" and "They are always friendly and helpful." However, people's dignity was not always promoted. We received mixed feedback about how people were supported to dress and whether this reflected their preferences and dignity. We also found evidence of people not being supported with their personal care in line with their care plan. For example, one person's care plan specified personal care should be given by female staff. However, on the day of the assessment they were being supported by male staff.

Staff demonstrated kindness and compassion when talking about how they supported people. The management team responded promptly to our feedback about ensuring people's dignity was promoted, confirming they would speak with staff and provide additional training and guidance as required.

We received mixed feedback about how well staff understood people's individual needs and preferences for support and how well staff communicated with people to ensure they felt listened to and understood.

During the assessment we found people's dignity and privacy were not always respected. We observed staff talking about people's continence care in communal areas and discussing people's personal care in hallways where they could be easily overheard. We observed staff talking to a person about their health concerns in a communal lounge. Staff did not offer the person the choice about whether they would like to discuss their concerns in private.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People's choice and control of their care had not always been promoted by staff; however, this was now improving. People's care plans had not always clearly detailed how to ensure people were able to make decisions about their daily care such as when to get up and go to sleep, what they liked to eat and how they liked to spend their time. Staff had not always provided support which reflected people’s individual preferences. The management team had now made amendments to people's care plans to ensure people’s preferences were more clearly recorded. People's relatives gave examples of how staff encouraged people and promoted their independence. Comments included, "I do feel [person] can be as independent as they are able to be", "[Person] had been so isolated from life they did not join in anything, but with encouragement from staff they now join in so much" and "They will always include [person] although they are unable to do much for themselves."

Staff and leaders were able to give examples of how they encouraged people to make choices in their daily care and promoted independence. Comments included, "Residents are always asked what they would like and given options, even if they have difficulties expressing themselves. The care staff are very patient." and " We offer lots of choices to the residents every day and ask them questions to check they understand."

During the assessment we observed staff offering people choices and providing support which enabled people to maintain their independence where possible.

The provider's processes for promoting people's choice and control were not always robust. We found care had at times been delivered in a way which suited the service, rather than people's individual preferences. The new management team were aware of these concerns and were making improvements to people's care records and reviewing communication with staff to ensure changes were made.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.