Bridge House Residential Home

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 good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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. People’s care plans were not always personalised reflecting their involvement and details of their individual preferences.

Some people were clearly able to express their individual needs and wishes and made decisions about how they spent their time or when they needed assistance from staff, which was respected. Others required more support. Staff we spoke with did not always feel they had the time to provide person centred care due to the level of support some people required.

We observed positive interactions between people, their relatives, and staff. Staff were polite, friendly, offering encouragement and support.

Staff told us they had received training in person centred care and dementia awareness as part of the programme of e-learning. Records seen showed most staff had completed the training.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider was aware of the Accessible Information Standards. Information, such as the feedback surveys, were presented in a suitable format, such as easy read. This could be explored further considering the needs of people with sensory loss.

People’s communications needs were reflected in their care plans.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas. Opportunities for people and their relatives to feedback about their experiences needed expanding upon. Feedback surveys had been distributed to people, their relatives and staff in January 2025. Responses had been analysed and areas of improvement identified.

People’s care records did not always show how people had been involved and made decisions, where possible, about their care.

People and their relatives said they felt able to raise any concerns they may have. Most people said they would speak with staff in the first instances, whilst one relative said they would go to the manager, although they were not sure who was in charge. It was noted the manager had only been in post 4 weeks at the time of our visit. A schedule of meetings with people and their relatives were to be held throughout the year, providing an opportunity to meet with the manager as well as discuss events within the home and things that were important to them.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this.

The service had recently appointed an activity worker. However, they split their hours between a care role and activities. In house opportunities were being provided however people told us they no longer had the opportunity to access the local and wider community, which they would like to do.

People’s rights to family life were encouraged and respected. There was an open visiting policy, which was confirmed by people’s relatives, who said they could visit any time and were made welcome.

Staff completed training in equality and diversity as part of the online training programme. This training aims to promote fairness, respect, and inclusion for everyone.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.