Bridge House

Updated 9 December 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

This inspection took place on 25 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 9 December 2020

This inspection took place on 12 and 14 September 2018 and was unannounced. The previous inspection was carried out on 10 and 13 May 2016. We rated the service good overall. Since the last inspection a new provider had taken over the service. There had been no change in legal entity.

Bridge House is registered to provide accommodation for up to 16 people who require help with personal care. The service specialises in the care of older people but does not provide nursing care. At the time of our visit there were 16 people living at the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

People using the service said they felt safe and that staff and the registered manager treated them well. Staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported from abuse. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available for staff and they told us they would use it if they needed to.

Systems and processes were in place to keep people safe and risks associated with people's care needs had been assessed.

There were processes in place to ensure the premises and equipment were regularly checked and to manage the prevention and control of infection. The registered manager reviewed accidents and falls to ensure people had the right support to keep them safe. People were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals, medicines were securely stored, and the administration of medicines was recorded appropriately.

Recruitment of employees was robust with good record keeping and checks including DBS and ID procedures. These checks ensure that staff are not barred from working with vulnerable people and have a right to work in the UK. Sufficient numbers of staff were employed who had the knowledge and skills to meet people's needs.

Staff had received training to meet the needs of people using the service. They had also received regular supervision and an appraisal of their work performance. The registered manager and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were supported with maintaining a balanced diet and the people who used the service chose their meals and these were provided in line with their preferences. People were encouraged to attend appointments with other health care professionals to maintain their health and well-being.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people's independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends.

Visitors were made to feel welcome. People were supported to practice their faith.

People had personalised care plans, which detailed how they wanted staff to meet their individual needs. Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs, in the service and within the local community.

The provider had an effective complaints procedure in place and people who used the service and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint. The provider had a quality assurance process in place. People who used the service, relatives and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service through meetings and surveys.

There were effective processes in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service.