Bridle Lodge

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they did not always work in partnership with people to decide how to respond to relevant changes in people’s needs.

During the assessment, relatives consistently told us they felt their loved ones were safe and well cared for; however, they felt that opportunities for person‑centred activities and outings could be improved. While care was delivered in a kind and supportive manner, it did not always fully reflect people’s preferences for meaningful engagement and community access.

One relative told us, “[Name] is bored. They [staff] take good care of them, but there isn’t always a car available for them to go out or enough staff for them to go on public transport. So [Name] gets really bored.” This feedback highlighted that although people received safe care, limitations in resources and planning meant people were not always supported to live the lives they chose or take part in activities that mattered to them.

Improvements were required to ensure people’s preferences, interests and changing needs were consistently central to care planning and delivery, and that the provider worked in partnership with people and their families to support meaningful, person‑centred experiences.

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. Staff had a good understanding of people’s individual health needs and were aware of the professionals involved in their ongoing care. They worked collaboratively with other stakeholders, including the local authority and a range of healthcare professionals, to promote coordinated and consistent support.

Care plans contained clear guidance for staff regarding people’s annual health checks and monitoring requirements linked to their specific conditions. This supported staff to ensure people received timely and appropriate healthcare and helped maintain continuity across different services involved in people’s care.

These approaches meant people experienced well‑coordinated, integrated care that met their needs and supported positive health outcomes.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up‑to‑date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information was provided in ways that supported people to understand and engage with their care and daily routines. Staff had a good understanding of people’s communication needs and adapted information accordingly to ensure it was accessible and meaningful.

For example, people had personalised activity boards displayed using their preferred communication method, including a Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS). This supported individuals with limited speech to communicate their wants, needs and thoughts through the use of pictures, symbols and photographs. These visual aids helped people understand daily plans, make choices about activities and feel more involved in decisions about their day.

This approach demonstrated the provider’s commitment to inclusive practice and ensured people received information in a way that promoted understanding, choice and confidence.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. However, record‑keeping did not always evidence how this was done or how people had responded.

Systems were in place to support people and relatives to raise concerns, and people told us staff were responsive when issues arose. However, records did not consistently demonstrate how people were actively involved in care planning or how their feedback influenced care and support.

Relatives told us they were not always included in care planning or reviews. One relative said, “I don’t have any concerns because they phone me if something happens, but I have never been asked to review the care plan. I don’t think I have ever seen it so I can’t say if it matches [name’s] needs.” This indicated that while communication occurred in response to incidents, relatives were not always meaningfully involved in ongoing planning and review of care.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were supported to access health and social care services in a timely way. The provider took people’s individual needs, communication requirements and personal circumstances into account to ensure access to services was fair, inclusive and responsive. Staff understood how to support people to attend appointments and liaised with external professionals to reduce barriers to access.

Where people required reasonable adjustments, these were made to support equal access to care and treatment. This ensured people received the right support at the right time and were not disadvantaged due to disability, communication needs or other protected characteristics.

The provider had an equality and diversity statement and policy in place, which reflected and reinforced their core values of kindness, commitment and creativity. These values were evident in staff interactions and in the way support was personalised to reduce the risk of unequal outcomes. Staff were encouraged and supported to use their skills confidently and without fear of discrimination, harassment or unfair treatment. This promoted a positive working culture where staff could focus on delivering personalised, empathetic care.

Leaders ensured that equity was not just a policy but an active part of service development. Staff were consulted on the equality and diversity statement and policy and were invited to share their own experiences, perspectives and ideas for improvement. This collaborative approach ensured the policy was meaningful and relevant to daily practice and helped create an environment where Bridle Lodge remained equitable and inclusive for everyone.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, giving them enough time and information to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. At the time of the assessment, no one was receiving end‑of‑life care. However, care plans contained clear details about people’s wishes in the event of an emergency, ensuring staff understood how individuals wanted to be supported should their health needs change unexpectedly.

Relatives and those important to people were involved in helping shape plans for the future, including ongoing care needs, responses during illness and arrangements for emergencies. Staff approached these discussions sensitively, recognising that conversations about future health and end‑of‑life preferences can be difficult. They took time to explore people’s views in a respectful and compassionate way, ensuring individuals felt comfortable, listened to and supported throughout the process.