CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bridge House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were identified and reviewed, there were enough staff, medicines were recorded correctly and infection prevention measures were in place.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care assessments reflected people's needs and choices. Staff supported people with food, drink, health appointments and least restrictive decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and supportive. Inspectors saw positive relationships and found that privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and people were involved in decisions. The home offered activities, supported visits and had a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an inclusive culture, approachable management, regular audits and good partnership working with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Bridge House Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care.
Inspectors visited without notice on three dates in June 2023. They spoke with 9 people, 5 relatives, 14 staff members and a professional. They also reviewed care, medicines, staffing, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, well-managed risks, safe medicines support and good infection prevention. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home provided personalised care, activities, support with food and drink, and access to health professionals. Inspectors also found a complaints process and regular quality checks. The overall rating had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in August 2021.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were consistent and based on people's individual needs. People said staff were available when needed.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff administered medicines carefully and explained them to people. Records were complete and regular audits were carried out.
“Medicine Administration Records (MAR) charts were clearly completed with no errors identified.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported independence and respected people's preferences about how they spent their time.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff who promoted their independence.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's life histories, choices and preferences. Staff involved people in decisions about their care.
“Care plans were person-centred and detailed people's individual choices.” from the report
Improved oversight
The home had introduced wider analysis of accidents and incidents since the previous inspection. Regular audits were used to identify and address improvements.
“We saw additional trend analysis had been introduced and embedded.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual risks, such as falls or skin problems?
- 02How will you support my relative's food, drink and dietary needs, including any changes in weight?
- 03What activities and support will be available to help my relative maintain relationships and avoid isolation?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in care plan reviews and decisions?
- 05How would you respond if we raised a complaint or concern?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC key questions, including infection prevention and control, with visits on three dates. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 August 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Bridge House Care Home was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found better care and safety, but safety systems and leadership were not yet fully reliable.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 01 July 2021. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, a relative and a health professional. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files, rotas, training records and management records.
The home had improved since its last inspection, when it was rated Inadequate. Staffing, medicines support, infection control, risk assessments and communication had improved. People were treated with kindness and respect, and the Caring rating improved to Good.
The Safe and Well-led ratings were Requires Improvement. Accident and incident analysis was not yet complete for every type of incident. Improvements to audits and management systems were still new and needed to be sustained. The home was no longer in breach of regulations and had left Special Measures.
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors saw evidence that people were involved in care reviews and that their privacy and dignity were supported.
“People were supported by caring staff.” from the report
Improved staffing
People, relatives and staff said staffing levels had improved since the previous inspection. Staff felt there were enough people to meet residents' needs.
“Staffing levels had dramatically improved since January 2021.” from the report
Better risk management
Care plans included detailed risk assessments, including nutrition and oral health assessments. Falls were being reviewed using new monitoring and analysis records.
“We found that a new falls trend analysis had been introduced with graphs to show progress and what actions had been taken to reduce falls” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, following visiting guidance and taking steps to prevent and manage infections.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Improved medicines support
People said they received their medicines when needed. Staff had medicines training and competency checks, and a digital system had been introduced to alert managers to errors.
“Since our last inspection a digital medicine administration system had been introduced.” from the report
Incident analysis was incomplete
needs fixingThe home had introduced stronger analysis for falls, but had not yet introduced the same approach for all accidents and incidents. Inspectors recommended extending this work.
“We recommend the provider introduce the same level of analysis for all accidents and incidents that has been introduced for falls.” from the report
Improvements needed to become routine
needs fixingManagement audits had improved, but inspectors said the changes were new and had not yet been embedded in everyday practice. This meant there was still limited assurance that improvements would continue.
“These changes were at an early stage so not yet embedded into every day practise and needed time to be sustained.” from the report
Management visibility
minorSome people and relatives said the registered manager was not always visible in the home and spent a lot of time in the office.
“People and relatives commented on the registered manager not always being visible in the home.” from the report
- 01How do you now analyse accidents and incidents other than falls, and how do you act on any patterns?
- 02What checks show that the recent improvements to audits and governance have been sustained?
- 03How often is the manager visible and available to residents and relatives in the home?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient when staff are absent?
- 05How are medicines errors identified and followed up through the digital medicines system?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led, with infection control also checked; Effective and Responsive were not looked at and ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 August 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Bridge House Care Home
7 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2021Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementCaring: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 November 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.