Bridgewater Home Care

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of decisions about their care and support. People were involved in planning their care and, where their needs changed, decisions were made in partnership with them to ensure support continued to reflect their preferences and wishes.
People were encouraged to be involved in planning their care, so that person centred care was delivered. For example, some people wanted support to help them care for their pets. Where this formed part of their agreed care, staff assisted by feeding animals and letting them into the garden.
People spoke positively about the care they received. One person told us, “I am very happy with BHC, over the moon, they are everything I want and more. My husband had care from them 4 times a day and he was very happy with them too.”
This showed people received care that reflected what was important to them and designed around their individual preferences.
 

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, ensuring care was joined-up, flexible, and supported choice and continuity.
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs and preferences and were reviewed regularly to ensure the support provided continued to meet their needs.
The service worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure continuity of care. Guidance and advice were sought when required to support positive outcomes for people.
Relatives were informed of changes in people's needs and involved in discussions about care and support where appropriate.
Detailed handover records were completed following each visit. This ensured important information was shared between staff, supported continuity of care, and enabled any additional support needs to be identified and met.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The electronic care system allowed people and their relatives daily access to the system which included daily record. One relative shared, “I find the App really useful – I can see exactly what the carers have done, and it gives me a rota.” The provider produced a monthly newsletter to share updates with people using the service, their relatives and the wider community, helping to keep people informed and engaged.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise concerns about their care and support. People were involved in decisions about their care and were encouraged to share their views on the service they received.
The service sought feedback from people and their relatives through surveys and regular discussions. People were invited to comment on the quality of the care provided and identify any areas for improvement. Feedback we received was overwhelmingly positive. People and those important to them were involved in discussions about their care and support needs from the outset. One person told us, "[manager] came out and did a long sit down with me, my sister and [person] and spent an hour writing everything down and then did a care plan which my sister has."

The provider ensured people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Prior to care commencing, people received an assessment to ensure support was planned and delivered in line with their identified needs. We found no evidence of delays in implementing care packages once agreements had been reached. Where people required additional support due to communication difficulties, these needs were clearly documented within care plans and care tasks. This ensured staff were aware of the support required and enabled people to access the services they needed in an effective and timely manner.

Staff and leaders actively sought and listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequalities in their experiences or outcomes and tailored care, support, and treatment in response to their individual needs.
The service took time to understand people's cultural, religious, and personal preferences and recorded them within care plans. People's choices were considered when planning care, and their views and wishes were gathered throughout the assessment process, regular reviews, and through ongoing discussions with their carers during visits.
Where people experienced difficulties communicating their needs, relatives were involved in care planning where appropriate to help ensure their preferences and wishes were understood and respected.
 

People were supported to plan for important life changes, enabling them to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their lives.
Whilst staff had not received specific end-of-life care training, this topic had previously been included within the provider's person-centred care training. The provider had recently introduced a dedicated end-of-life care training programme to further develop staff knowledge and skills.
Although this training had only recently been implemented, staff had experience of supporting people at the end of their lives and demonstrated compassion, understanding, and dignity when providing this care. Staff worked alongside district nurses and palliative care teams so that people received appropriate support.
The service received positive feedback and thanks from relatives following the passing of people who used the service. One relative of a person receiving end-of-life care said, “[Person] is very safe and [staff] could not have been more supportive.”