The Bridge Care Home

People were protected from the risk of abuse, and there were appropriate safeguarding systems in place. When things went wrong, lessons were shared to reduce the risk of recurrence. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs, and staff were supported through training and supervision to be effective in their roles. Infection prevention and control practices were followed, and the health and safety of the environment was assessed.

There were established systems and processes to audit the quality of the service. The registered manager took prompt action when an error was identified.Complaints were managed appropriately in line with the provider’s policy. There was visible leadership throughout the service. People, their relatives and staff told us the service was well run. The registered manager was approachable, responsive and open to feedback.

People were supported to eat a balanced diet and drink enough to remain hydrated. They had access to healthcare services to maintain good health, and staff worked effectively with external professionals. People were supported to make decisions about their care and treatment, and consent procedures were followed. The service operated in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act, supporting people to have choice and control and using the least restrictive approaches.

Staff were caring and compassionate, and people were treated with dignity and respect. Independence was promoted wherever possible. People’s needs were assessed and care plans reflected their individual preferences, support needs and risks. End‑of‑life wishes were documented appropriately. The service worked collaboratively with a range of external organisations to meet people’s needs and support service improvement.