Brookview Neurological Centre-Inspire Neurocare (Worcester)

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 3 March 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 20 to 26 January 2026. This assessment was prompted by concerns received about the quality of care provided. At our last assessment, we rated the service ‘good’. At this assessment, the rating has remained ‘good’.

Brookview Neurological Centre-Inspire Neurocare (Worcester) is a specialist neurological care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 43 people. At the time of our assessment there were 34 people using the service.

We assessed the service against ‘Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Overall, the provider was working in line with these principles and ensured people were respected and treated well.

People received safe care provided by appropriately recruited and trained staff. Staff knew how to recognise and report safeguarding concerns internally and externally. Some care plans and risk assessments required more information on how to meet people’s needs. We raised this with the leadership of the service, who addressed this issue before the second day of our assessment. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, the environment people lived in was clean, and the provider undertook checks of the premises. People were supported to take their medicines by staff who had the correct skills to support them. Safeguarding events were raised appropriately and lessons learned were shared from accidents and incidents.

Staff and other professionals commented initial assessments required improvements to ensure staff have all information about people before their admissions. The acting manager told us they recognised this issue and reported it to the head office. They told us this was caused by multiple admissions in a short period of time. Since then, new admissions were stopped and weekly meetings with head office took place to discuss discharges and occupancy. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The provider worked well with local partners and there was a shared direction amongst the staff team. Staff told us they felt able to speak up and there were governance systems in place to review the quality of the care provided, however the provider made improvements in response to feedback we provided. People, their relatives and staff praised the leadership skills of the acting manager.