Brenalwood Care Home

“Since 2022 the service had been rated either inadequate or requires improvement, with repeated breaches of regulation relating to staffing, safe care and treatment and governance. The provider had failed to respond adequately to serious concerns raised by CQC, and where the provider had made improvements, they had failed to ensure they were embedded in practice and sustained.”

“At our last assessment published in March 2025, the provider had failed to sustain the improvements made at the previous inspection and was again rated inadequate and remained in breach of regulations relating to safe care and treatment, staffing and governance.”

“At this assessment we found the provider had worked to make improvements and they were no longer in breach of regulation. Some improvements were ongoing and not yet fully implemented, and we needed to be assured the improvements made were embedded in practice and sustained.”

“Improvements had been made to the governance systems and overall monitoring of the service, including a new direct and senior management team. At our previous assessment, we were concerned about the stability of the management of the service, and at this assessment, we found a further change had been made. Although the systems for monitoring the service had improved, we identified there were still some areas which required further improvement, such as in people’s care records, risk assessments and medicines which had not been addressed at the time of our assessment.”

“Improvements had been made to how the service learned lessons from incidents and safeguarding people from abuse. There were now enough staff to support people using the service, which needed to be sustained. However, at the time of the inspection there were only 14 people using the service. We were told by the management team a gradual increase in numbers would be happening to ensure there were enough staff and documentation was in place to support new people moving in.”

“Improvements had been made to how staff were recruited, and they received regular individual supervision and training. The facilities and equipment met people’s needs, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated.”

“People and their representatives, as appropriate, were now being consulted about their care and needs and preferences. Staff worked with other professionals to ensure the best outcomes. Staff supported people to maintain good health and to meet their dietary and hydration needs. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. However, daily records did not always show people had consented to care being provided. Staff involved those important to people took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.”

“Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and protected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff treated people as individuals and supported their preferences. Staff responded to people in a timely way. The provider supported staff wellbeing.”

“Staff provided information people could understand. There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to give feedback. Staff provided people with fair and equal care and treatment. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or…”