St Bernard's Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

At our last assessment we rated caring as good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. Staff respected and valued patients as individuals; and supported them to be involved in decisions about their care.

Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness. They mostly respected patients’ privacy and dignity. They understood the individual needs of patients and supported patients to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. Staff involved patients in care planning and risk assessment and actively sought their feedback on the quality of care provided. Staff informed and involved families and carers appropriately.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always respect people’s privacy and dignity. However, staff mostly treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion.

We spoke with 9 patients and 9 relatives/carers of patients across all 3 wards. Patient feedback overall was positive. They said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. We heard comments included that the staff were “good” and that they “worked hard”. Two patients on Jubilee ward reported that they wanted to be more involved in their care and treatment. All the patients at The Limes were very positive about their care. Comments included “staff are very nice and helpful”, “physical care is given with kindness” and that they “feel safe”.

Carer feedback was mixed across the wards visited. A consistent theme identified on both Jubilee and Meridian wards was the quality and consistency of communication with carers. On Jubilee ward, carers raised concerns about staff attitudes and reported that nurses were frequently in the office rather than visible on the ward. In contrast, feedback from carers on The Limes was overwhelmingly positive, with carers expressing satisfaction with the care provided and their interactions with staff.

During our site visit we undertook 3 short observational framework for inspection (SOFI) observations during our inspection on each ward. These observations demonstrated that most staff interactions with people were discreet, respectful, and responsive, with support provided in a timely manner when needed. However, on Meridian Ward, we observed one patient having their blood glucose monitored at the dining table, which did not fully promote privacy and dignity. We also observed a member of staff abruptly removing a piece of cutlery from a patient, which did not reflect the respectful approach expected in patient care. We saw other observations on all three wards where patients were laughing, on Meridian ward patients engaged in an art activity, on The Limes patients playing skittles. We saw some one-to-one activities on Jubilee ward as a group activity was abandoned due to the acuity levels.

We observed staff knocking on bathroom and bedroom doors. However, on Jubilee ward the bathroom and toilet doors opened outwards and patients were visible using the toilet to people in the corridor. This compromised patient’s privacy. The concerns regarding the door design and opening were already identified in the ward environmental improvement plan.

Staff supported people to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. This was through regular one-to-one session, ward rounds, CPA meetings, meeting with psychologists, social workers and discharge co-ordinators. Staff provided assistance with aspects of daily living, activities, medicines and access to the community and external services.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of patients’ individual needs and provided care that was respectful of their personal, cultural, social, and religious preferences. Care was delivered in a person-centred manner, recognising and valuing diversity and promoting equality. We saw that continence management aids, personal care items such as toothbrushes, denture pots and batteries for hearing aids were provided as required by individual patients. During the inspection, we observed that patients were supported to wear their own clothing and footwear, including examples of culturally sensitive practice. At The Limes, 2 patients were supported to wear culturally appropriate clothing that reflected their identity and beliefs. This demonstrated that staff respected patients’ cultural backgrounds and supported them to express their individuality while maintaining their dignity and wellbeing.

Patients we spoke with felt able to raise concerns or complaints and felt that they were listened to.

Staff maintained the confidentiality of information about patients. Staff maintained confidentiality and only shared information with other agencies when it was necessary to keep people safe.

Staff also said they felt empowered to raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour, and were confident that managers would listen and take action.

Staff we spoke to told us they felt safe to raise any concerns about care if they had them. They were also aware of the freedom to speak up guardian and knew how to access this, should they need to.

Meridian Ward facilitated a monthly carers' group, while Jubilee ward was exploring the reintroduction of a similar forum. During our review of carers' group meeting minutes from Meridian Ward, we found evidence that staff offered and explained carers' assessments, outlining how these could identify and provide appropriate support for individuals in their caring role.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. Records showed that staff involved families and carers appropriately in patients’ care and treatment.

Staff within the service had a good understanding of people’s mental health, their risk history and their social circumstances outside of the service. The service made adjustments for disabled patients. All three wards were on the ground floor and were accessible to disabled people. The service assessed and responded to patients’ specific communication needs.

Staff ensured that patients and their families could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights, how to complain and so on. All 3 wards had clear patient information displayed. The information provided was in a form accessible to the patient group. Staff made information leaflets available in languages spoken by patients when required.

Staff arranged interpreters for patients and carers and provided information in accessible formats if required.

Patients had access to a choice of meals that met a range of dietary requirements, including those relating to religious and cultural preferences, allergies, and intolerances. In the dining area, specialist equipment such as adapted cutlery and cups was available to support patients with additional needs to eat and drink independently. Where specialist equipment was purchased for an individual patient, it was allocated solely to that person for their exclusive use.

Staff ensured that patients had access to appropriate spiritual support, for example at The Limes the local chaplain visited weekly. On Jubilee ward we heard of staff creating a dedicated space for a patient’s prayer mat so that they could pray in line with their faith throughout the day.

Staff understood and respected the individual needs of each patient. They adapted their approach to each individual and worked with patients’ individual preferences. For example, at The Limes, a patient chose to sleep in a recliner chair rather than in their bed. Staff worked closely with the patient's family to understand their preferences and ensure their comfort and wellbeing. A person-centred approach was followed, with appropriate risk assessments and monitoring in place to support the patient's choice while maintaining their safety.

The staff and management team spoke respectfully about the patients they cared for and talked of valuing people and respecting their human rights.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families where possible. Patients were supported to keep in touch with their families through face-to-face visits or remotely on the phone or video calls. The service supported families to keep in touch with their relatives, visit the service when possible, and attend care programme approach meetings either in person or remotely.

We saw that carers were involved in patients' care and were invited to attend meetings and events. Staff routinely sought feedback from carers about the service provided. Carers reported that clearer communication regarding ward routines would be beneficial, particularly in relation to visiting times, ward round arrangements, and how to contact the nurse in charge. Carers were also able to provide feedback through the Trust's Friends and Family Test questionnaire.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views, and wishes, ensuring care remained person-centred and responsive to individual circumstances. Staff identified, assessed, and responded appropriately to changing risks to patients and risks posed by patients. Comprehensive risk assessments were completed for all patients on admission and were routinely reviewed and updated through multidisciplinary team discussions to ensure care remained safe and effective.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of patients’ physical and mental health needs and were knowledgeable about how to respond promptly to healthcare emergencies, helping to minimise the risk of patients becoming distressed or unwell, both emotionally and physically. Staff consistently used de-escalation techniques and therapeutic engagement to reduce the need for restrictive practices when patients became distressed or their behaviours escalated.

Where required, patients had positive behavioural support plans in place. These plans clearly identified potential triggers, early warning signs of distress, and personalised strategies for staff to use in supporting patients safely and effectively.

Appropriate systems and guidance were available to support staff in responding to patients’ immediate needs. Bedrooms were equipped with nurse call alarms, and staff carried personal alarms to enable them to summon urgent assistance quickly when required, supporting a safe environment for both patients and staff.

Staff were aware of specific individual risks, including falls, poor nutrition, and pressure ulcer risks, and these were appropriately assessed, monitored, and reflected within care plans. Risk management strategies were tailored to patients’ needs and regularly reviewed to promote safety while supporting independence wherever possible.

We observed staff to be present in the communal areas engaging with patients and responding to patients’ requests promptly.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Adjustments were made for staff to support them in their roles. This included reasonable adjustments to working patterns, implementing a flexible working pattern alongside adjusting staff duties if there were any changes to their physical health.

Staff said they felt respected, mostly supported and valued. Staff said they felt positive and proud about working for the provider and their team.

Staff had access to support for their own physical and emotional health needs through an occupational health service that included access to counselling.

The provider recognised staff success within the service, including through staff awards. The ward manager on Jubilee ward had won the Trust Unsung Hero in Nursing Award in the 2026 Nursing Conference​. The Allied Health Professionals physical health team for the service were the overall winners of Team of the Year at the Trust AHP Conference​ 2026.

Staff appraisal and supervision sessions included conversations about wellbeing and personal development.

In February 2026, Jubilee ward was placed under a Level 2 Support and Intervention Procedure following concerns identified across a range of quality, safety, workforce, governance and leadership indicators. Prior to the implementation of the improvement plan, senior leaders met with ward staff to explain the reasons for the intervention and its intended purpose. The Trust's Freedom to Speak Up Guardian was also involved in the consultation process. This demonstrated a commitment from senior leaders to engage openly and transparently with staff, ensuring they were informed and given opportunities to raise questions and concerns regarding the planned improvements. Staff we spoke with on Jubilee ward confirmed that they were aware of the plan and the reasons for it.

At The Limes, staff were consulted and actively engaged regarding the proposed change in the ward's function and the associated reduction in bed numbers. This demonstrated that leaders sought staff views and involved them in the change process, helping to ensure that those affected were informed, able to contribute feedback, and supported to understand the rationale for the changes being implemented.

​We reviewed each ward’s action plan developed in response to the 2026 staff survey results. These plans identified areas for improvement based on feedback provided by staff and demonstrated how leaders had responded to concerns. On Jubilee ward, changes had been made to shift patterns to reduce the length of the working day and improve staff wellbeing. At The Limes, the staffing model had been reviewed in response to concerns about staff regularly working beyond their contracted hours. On Meridian Ward, plans were also in place to strengthen staff engagement and involvement in decision-making processes, particularly when changes to the service were being considered or implemented.

Staff appraisals included conversations about career development and how it could be supported. We heard of many examples where staff had been able to progress. For example, at The Limes a healthcare facilitator completed the Trust apprenticeship programme and was now working as a nurse on the ward.