Bluebell Manor

Updated 29 June 2026

The assessment was carried out between 27 August 2026 – 18 September 2026. We undertook 2 visits to the home on 27 August and 3 September 2026 and reviewed information that the management team sent us electronically following our visits.

Bluebell Manor provides personal care for up to 67 people, including older and younger adults and people living with dementia. At the time of the assessment, 40 people were using the service. The home provides care across 3 suites, Millview, Wansbeck and Bluebell. Bluebell was a male-only suite.

The provider was registered to provide nursing care at the home; however, this was not being provided and no nurses were employed. The provider told us they would apply to remove nursing care from the home’s registration.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations relating to staffing and good governance. We carried out this assessment to review whether the provider had made the required improvements. Improvements were found and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations.

The provider’s registration included a condition preventing them from providing a specialist service where a learning disability and/or autism was the person’s primary care need. A small number of people had a learning disability, however, their primary care needs arose from other conditions. We therefore considered how their needs were being met against the principles of ‘Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture.’ These principles aim to ensure people with a learning disability and autism are supported to have choice, control, independence and access to their local community. We found the principles of ‘Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture’ were being met.

The environment met people's needs. The provider had invested in an extensive programme of redevelopment and improvements to the home, including the garden and outdoor areas. This included improvements to lighting, furniture and colour schemes, as well as adaptive seating with lumbar support to promote people’s comfort, wellbeing and safety.

Staff we spoke with demonstrated an understanding of safeguarding procedures. No safeguarding concerns were raised during our assessment.

Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff followed safe medicines processes and management provided examples of using STOMP (Stopping Over Medication of People with a Learning Disability, Autism or both) principles to reduce medicines where appropriate and support least restrictive practice.

There were sufficient staff deployed. We observed care and support being carried out in a calm unhurried manner. The provider completed a range of pre-employment checks to help ensure staff were suitable for their roles. They held a certificate of sponsorship, enabling the recruitment of overseas staff where required which helped to support workforce stability.

Systems were in place to enable staff to carry out their roles effectively. Staff told us they felt well supported. A staff member stated, “Overall, I am very pleased with my experience of working at Bluebell Manor. I feel supported, valued and proud to contribute to the care provided to the residents. I would be very happy to recommend Bluebell Manor as a positive place to work and receive care.”

Staff worked in line with best practice when supporting people who experienced distress or whose needs could sometimes be expressed in ways that others might find difficult to understand. We received positive feedback from health and social care professionals about the service and the improvements made since the provider acquired the home. A health and social care professional stated, “A wonderful turnaround where residents are looked after well and we get all the help we need to deliver oral care.”

Formal complaints were recorded and responses provided. We identified an opportunity to strengthen oversight of concerns raised informally and to ensure these were recorded. This would help identify any recurring trends or themes and demonstrate how feedback had been used to drive improvements within the service.

The provider had clear governance arrangements in place. Regular audits and quality reviews covered areas including medicines, infection prevention and control, and the dining experience. Oversight from senior leaders supported the monitoring of the quality and safety of the service and identified areas for improvement.

Updated 29 June 2026

Some people could not directly tell us about their experience. We used a structured observation tool to help us understand their experience of care.

People were safe and were treated well by staff. A person said, “Yes, I feel safe. The staff are nice and treat me well. We have a nice time and do different things.” People and most relatives spoke positively about the staff. A relative said, “When I arrive and I pop in, very often she's in the residents’ lounge. Sometimes she'll be sitting next to a member of staff who'll be holding her hand or reading to her or could be dancing with her and they know what sort of music that she likes to dance to.” Some feedback received suggested the level of engagement varied between staff, with some spending more time talking and engaging with people than others.

People and relatives generally felt there were enough staff, although some said staff could be busy at times. We observed staff supporting people in a calm and unhurried manner. People said they were familiar with many day staff, but some reported less continuity during evenings and nights. The registered manager explained that staff turnover was low and the same agency staff were used, when required alongside permanent staff to provide greater familiarity for people.

People and relatives spoke positively about the quality of the food. Comments included, “The food is very good. They're very conscious that most residents tend to lose weight, but her weight has been stable” and “They mix the food so it's the right consistency for her.” People were supported with their individual dietary and nutritional needs, including adapted food and support with eating and drinking.

People and most relatives were positive about the home environment, A relative said, “It's immaculate. The whole place has just been decorated and they've got new furnishings. It's clean and there are pictures on her wall.” However, a small amount of feedback suggested areas of the home could be made more homely. In addition, a person also told us the call bell could be noticeable during the evening and at night. People had opportunities to access the local community, although a small amount of feedback from relatives suggested the steep driveway could make this more difficult and that some people would welcome more opportunities for outings. Staff told us taxis were arranged to support people to access the community when needed.

People were supported to pursue their interests and activities. This included exercise, gardening, birdwatching, beauty treatments and hobbies associated with previous careers. Relatives told us birthdays and anniversaries were recognised and celebrated. We received a small amount of feedback that some staff were less familiar with the local culture, which relatives felt could occasionally affect the development of rapport and shared understanding with people.