The Bridge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Staff carried out comprehensive assessments when people first moved into the home and continued to review these regularly, including after any incidents such as falls or changes in health or ability.

Assessments were holistic and covered people’s physical, mental, behavioural, personal care, social, nutritional and hydration needs. They also explored people’s cultural and spiritual preferences and identified what was important to each individual to support personalised care planning.

People and relatives told us they were involved in discussions about needs and support. Staff also described how important information was shared during handovers and daily flash meetings, ensuring all team members had up‑to‑date knowledge of people’s needs and could respond quickly and appropriately.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff used recognised, evidence‑based assessment tools to understand and monitor people’s needs. These included the Waterlow pressure area risk tool, the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST), ABC behavioural monitoring charts and structured pain assessment tools. The outcomes of these assessments informed care plans which guided staff on how to meet each person’s identified needs safely and effectively.

Where people experienced behaviours that may challenge, staff followed positive behaviour support strategies that focused on understanding triggers, reducing distress and promoting a calm, person‑centred approach.

People were supported to maintain good nutrition and hydration. They were offered choices of meals prepared and presented in an appetising way, and staff provided encouragement and assistance where needed to help people eat and drink enough. Care plans documented each person’s food and drink texture requirements using the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) framework, ensuring that modified diets were prepared safely for those with swallowing difficulties. People who required fortified foods or nutritional supplements received these as part of their daily support. Drinks, fruit and snacks were available throughout the day, and staff monitored intake where necessary to ensure people’s nutritional and hydration needs continued to be met. A person told us, “The food is really nice. I’m a bit of a fussy person but I enjoy most of the food here. I can ask for more and I can ask for something even if it is not on the menu for the day.” A relative told us, “The food is really good. They provide a service where we can sit and eat with our [relative] and that is a big thing for us that we can join them for lunch.” Another relative mentioned, “Loved one loves their food. They get a jug of water and cup on the table over their bed all the time so that they can reach it.”

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

The service had an emergency information pack for each person that summarised their needs, health conditions, communication requirements and other essential details. They also used the “Red Bag” system, which included important documents such as personal information, medication administration records (MAR), and any other required paperwork. When a person needed to go to hospital, the emergency pack and Red Bag were given to the ambulance crew to ensure hospital staff had immediate access to accurate and up‑to‑date information.

Staff followed up with hospital teams where necessary to provide verbal handovers or share additional information to help ensure the person’s needs were understood and met effectively during their hospital stay. This supported safe, consistent and person‑centred care across different services.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People told us they were well supported to access healthcare. A person said, “The GP comes around and if I need to see them, I let staff know.” A relative shared, “My [relative] sees the district nurse regularly. They go to the eye clinic, have hospital appointments and also see the dentist and chiropodist.”

The home had a weekly GP round and multidisciplinary meeting where people’s needs and health conditions were reviewed. Records showed involvement from a range of professionals, including district nurses, physiotherapists, and other community health specialists.

The provider also offered programmes to encourage healthy lifestyles. Regular fitness sessions were available, and a gym instructor supported people to participate safely. A person told us they used the gym at least 4 times a week, saying, “I go to the gym to help me stay fit and keep my legs moving.” People were encouraged and supported to maintain a healthy diet, including eating fruit and vegetables, and to drink fluids regularly to help reduce the risk of infection.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Care plans identified the outcomes people wanted to achieve. Staff worked closely with people and, where appropriate, relevant healthcare professionals to support people to achieve these outcomes and maintain their independence.

People and relatives told us staff supported them to maintain and improve their physical health. A person described how staff had supported them to improve their mobility. They told us that when they first moved into the home, they mainly used a wheelchair. However, staff encouraged and supported them to take part in regular exercises. The person said, “Staff encouraged and motivated me.”

A relative also told us their family member was supported to remain mobile. They told us, “Staff encourage them to walk with their walker.” This showed staff supported people to maintain their mobility and physical wellbeing in line with their abilities.

Staff worked with people and monitored their progress and adapted care where needed to ensure people achieved intended outcomes.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People, and their relatives where appropriate, gave consent to the care and support they received, and people’s liberty was promoted in line with legal guidance.

People told us they were actively involved in decisions about their care. A person said, “I can make my own decisions. Staff always involve me and check with me what I want first.” Another person told us, “The carers always ask me before making the tiniest decision because they know I’m capable.”

People’s capacity to make specific decisions was assessed and documented in their care plans. Where people were assessed as lacking capacity to make particular decisions, staff worked with relatives and relevant health and social care professionals to make decisions in the person’s best interests. We saw clear records of best‑interest decisions made for specific aspects of care, such as the use of bedrails.

Care plans also recorded details of any legal arrangements in place, including powers of attorney, ensuring staff understood who was authorised to make decisions on people’s behalf when required.