You are here

Archived: Bridges Healthcare Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

Bridges Healthcare Limited is a domiciliary care service, which provides personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection there were about 45 people using the service.

The service was inspected on August 2016, where we found the service was in breach of two regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2010. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Bridges Healthcare Limited’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We undertook a focused inspection in February 2017 in relation to the breaches of regulation we identified at our previous inspection of September 2016. We found that the service had followed their action plan and had made improvements. We could not however change the overall rating of the service because to do so required a record of consistent good practice.

We undertook an announced comprehensive inspection on 14 September 2017. We gave the registered manager 24 hours’ notice as we needed to be sure they would be available for the inspection. At this inspection we found that the service had sustained the improvements put in place following our previous inspections of September 2016 and February 2017 and met the legal requirements.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff handled and administered people’s medicines to them in a safe way. Staff had been trained and assessed in the safe administration of medicines and they understood and followed the organisation’s medicines policy.

Risks to people were assessed and detailed risk management plans put in place for staff to follow to keep people safe from avoidable harm. Staff understood risks associated with people and knew what the actions to take to reduce such risks.

Thorough recruitment checks took place before staff were allowed to work with vulnerable people. Staff understood how to recognise signs of abuse and how to protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff also knew and were encouraged to whistle blow if necessary to keep people safe.

Sufficient staff were deployed that ensured people needs were met in a timely way. People told us staff had sufficient time to safely support them. Staff confirmed time allocated to them to support people was sufficient. People also told us and the call monitoring system confirmed people received their care visits as planned.

The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities within the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were supported through effective induction, supervision, appraisal and training to provide effective service to people. People were supported to eat and drink appropriately and to meet their dietary and nutritional requirements. People were supported to arrange appointments to ensure their health needs were met. Relevant professionals were involved to ensure people received appropriate support and care that met their needs.

People were treated with kindness and their dignity respected by staff. People told us staff were caring and considerate towards them. Staff understood people’s needs, preferences and cared for as they wanted. People and their relatives were involved in planning their care and in day-to-day decisions about their care. Care plans were reviewed and updated regularly to reflect people’s changing needs. Staff told us they were updated with changes in people’s care.

People received care tailored to meet their individual needs. Staff encouraged and enabled people to do what they can do for themselves to keep them active and maintain their independence.

People and their relatives were given opportunity to share their vie

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

The service was safe. People were safeguarded from abuse. Staff were trained and understood the various forms of abuse that could occur and the signs to look for. They also knew how to report any concerns. They felt confident to raise issues with their line manager and believed they would take necessary actions. Staff knew how to whistleblow and were encouraged by their managers to do so if need be.

Risks to people were thoroughly assessed and management plans developed to reduce identified risks to people in order to keep them safe.

People received their medicines in line with their prescriptions. Medicines were managed safely. Medicine administration records were completed correctly..

Recruitment procedure was robust. Staff underwent checks to ensure they were suitable to work with people. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people�s needs and staff told us that that the time allocated to them to complete care visits were sufficient.

Effective

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

The service was effective. Staff were trained, supported and supervised to meet the needs of people.

People consented to their care, and where required, relatives and professionals were involved in the decisions. People had their care provided in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were given food and drinks to meet their nutritional needs. People told us they enjoyed the food provided at the service.

People had access to a range of healthcare services to maintain their well-being and health.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

The service was caring. People told us staff were kind and friendly, and treated them with respect and dignity.

People were involved in planning their care and in day-to-day decisions about their care.

Staff understood the needs of people and how to support them accordingly.

Staff knew people well and cared for them in line with their wishes and preferences.

Responsive

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

The service was responsive. Care plans detailed people�s preferences. Care and support was delivered to people in the way and manner they wanted.

People were supported to maintain their independence.

People and their relatives knew how to raise concerns and complaints and these were investigated and responded to in line with the provider's policy.

Well-led

Good

Updated 18 October 2017

The service was well led. There was clear management structure in place. Staff were provided with the leadership and direction they needed.

People and staff told us the registered manager and members of the management team listened and were open to feedbacks which were used to improve the service.

There were systems for monitoring the quality of service provided. There was a registered manager who complied with the terms of the registration with CQC.