CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Bridge House (Somerset)
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor improvements needed to accessible feedback and training.
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection on 7 and 8 February 2018. The inspector spoke with people using the home, relatives, staff, the manager and a health professional. They also reviewed care records, staff information, medicines, safety records and quality checks.
The home supported 11 adults with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people were safe, staff understood their needs, medicines were managed properly and there were enough staff. People received suitable healthcare, varied food and support that respected their choices, privacy and independence.
The home was rated Good overall and remained Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors noted that a feedback form was not suitable for people's communication abilities. They also noted that some staff thought more face-to-face training would be helpful.
Safety and medicines
Inspectors found suitable staffing, risk management, recruitment checks, infection control, premises maintenance and medicine systems. These arrangements helped protect people from harm.
“People were safe at the service because recruitment, staffing, medicine management, infection control, and upkeep of the premises protected people from unsafe situations and harm.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff understood people's individual needs and communication. They supported privacy, dignity, independence and emotional wellbeing.
“Staff relationships with people were caring and supportive and we observed a lot of laughter and banter between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, histories, communication needs and what might cause distress. Plans were reviewed with people and those who knew them well.
“Support plans were well organised with information easy to find and containing in-depth information relevant to the person.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to use the community daily, unless they chose not to. Activities included social events, sport, music, art, shopping and holidays.
“People spent time in the community every day unless they chose not to.” from the report
Strong management
Inspectors found committed leadership, effective teamwork and regular audits. The home looked for ways to improve people's lives and the service.
“It's very well led. There is a strong senior and management team and really good communication” from the report
Feedback was not fully accessible
minorThe organisation asked people to complete a quality monitoring form that required reading and interpretation skills they did not have. The manager said this would be discussed with the provider.
“However, the organisation had expected people to complete a form, which would require good reading, and interpretative skills, which people using the service did not have.” from the report
More face-to-face training
minorMost training was online, and some staff felt face-to-face training would be more effective. The manager said arrangements were being made for this.
“Most training was e learning and some staff said how more effective face to face training could be.” from the report
- 01How do you now collect feedback from people who cannot use standard written forms?
- 02Has more face-to-face training been introduced, and which subjects does it cover?
- 03How will you involve my relative in decisions about future end of life care?
- 04How will you match activities and community outings to my relative's interests and choices?
- 05How will you review my relative's care plan with them and with their family?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 February 2018 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 (Somerset)
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 June 2014.
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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,020 to £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.