- Care home
Bainbridge Court
Assessment report published 1 December 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 4 November 2025 to 13 November 2025.
Bainbridge Court is a residential care home providing personal care and accommodation to young people living with a learning disability and/or Autism.
People at the home were protected from harm. Systems and processes were in place to mitigate the risk of harm to people and to protect them from abuse. Staff had a clear understanding of their responsibilities under safeguarding, while the provider understood their regulatory responsibilities. Risks to people, health, support and environment had been assessed and staff mitigated these risks. People were supported by enough staff who had received the appropriate training to meet the needs of people at the home. Appropriate infection control procedures were in place to keep people safe.
People received effective care. Needs were assessed when people were admitted to the home and consistently reviewed. Staff were effective in supporting people manage their anxieties. People were supported, when needed, to access healthcare services and staff engaged with specialist support when this was needed. The provider had implemented and embedded the necessary changes to ensure a consistent approach in completing mental capacity assessments and making best interest decisions.
Staff treated people with kindness, sensitivity, and respect. People’s immediate needs were met by caring staff who understood people’s needs and knew how to anticipate any anxieties or concerns. People were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. People were engaged in activities and accessed the community safely with staff.
People received personalised care that was tailored to meet their individual needs, preferences and choices. Care plans were detailed and guided staff about people's needs and how to meet them. Concerns and complaints were listened to and used to improve the service they received. People’s communication needs were assessed in detail and staff used this information effectively to respond to people’s choices and wishes.
People, staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Management was approachable and open to feedback and discussions about people’s care. The quality of people’s care was supported by effective quality assurance systems. The registered manager encouraged feedback from people, staff and professionals involved in people’s care.
We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it. The provider was working in line with this guidance.
People's experience of this service
Not everyone could tell us directly of their experience of living at Bainbridge Court. During the inspection, although many people receiving care used non-verbal ways to communicate, we were still able to gain a clear understanding of their experiences and preferences. Some people used PECS, (Picture exchange communication system) while some used Makaton to communicate their wishes. Through observation of interactions, body language, and responses to care, alongside detailed feedback from relatives and partners in care, we gathered a positive and detailed picture of people’s experiences. One relative said, “Care is very good. Staff have a lot of time for (person).”
People appeared happy and relaxed, whether supported in shared areas or in the comfort of their own rooms. Staff were attentive and engaging and people looked comfortable in their company. Staff understood when some people needed or wanted space and did this discreetly while maintaining a close presence. One relative said, “They are really great as a team and very organised and this comes across in many ways.”
People’s voice, opinions and choices were sought by staff who used detailed communication guidance and tools to support this. People’s families were often an active part of people’s lives and were involved in their care and support. They told us that staff listened, and reacted positively, to suggestions about how to provide responsive, person-centred care. One relative said of staff, “They’ve been wonderful overall.” Another relative said of the care for their loved one, “They are very good with him. We are very pleased.”