Bridge Haven

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. Staff responded to people’s changing needs, supported them to access healthcare and protected them from discrimination. People were encouraged to plan for their future care needs, to make sure their choices and preferences were known. People and relatives had the opportunity to provide feedback about the service and received information in the way they could understand.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. There were processes in place to review people’s care plans to make sure they reflect people’s needs and were up to date. Relatives told us they were involved in reviewing and developing people’s care plans, “We did do a care plan when they first went in there. They asked us a few questions a couple of months ago. They will always come to me if there is a problem.” We observed staff supporting people in the way they preferred. For example, staff gave someone enough time to write down what medicines they were being given, as they knew this helped the person to feel safe. Staff knew how people liked to take their medicines, they described how people were supported to take their medicines in a specific way and how this supported people to remain healthy. People’s care plans contained details of their choices and preferences and who to involve when decisions needed to be made. We observed staff supporting people to make choices and respecting these by assisting people in their activities.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Staff worked with health and social care professionals to make sure people received the support they needed. When people went into hospital, staff went with them and provided the information needed to support the person safely. Staff recognised when people’s needs changed, staff worked with other professionals to make sure people were funded for the support they needed. When people required support on a one-to-one basis, this was provided, to make sure people were safe and supported.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. There was appropriate signage in the service to enable people to move around the service safely. People were provided with information in the format they required, such as easy read or pictorial format. People’s communication needs were assessed before they moved into the service. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people’s information confidential and people’s records to be accurate. The provider had policies in place in relation to storing and using information.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Relatives told us they knew how to raise complaints and concerns. When complaints had been raised these had been resolved. A relative told us, “I know them (management team) by sight and by name, they are very approachable.” Another relative told us, “We generally have a chat with the assistant manager and senior carers.” Relatives and residents were invited to meetings. Relatives told us they were encouraged to give feedback, “The residents meeting went quite well yesterday. They have always addressed any suggestions.” Another relative told us, “We had a relatives’ meeting yesterday and spoke to management; nothing major to flag up. They welcome suggestions; they have introduced parking cameras. Communication has got better, not that it was bad before.” Other relatives told us they did not attend the meetings, “We never go [to the relatives meeting] we put our points across while we visit.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were able to access all areas of the service and equipment, adjustments had been made for people with mobility needs. People were supported to access health appointments and health professionals attended the service when required. Staff referred people to health professionals when their needs changed. Health professionals told us staff did this quickly and followed the advice given.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support, and treatment in response to this. The provider had policies in place to promote equality and reduce discrimination. Staff understood their responsibility to promote equality and challenge discrimination people may experience. Care plans and assessments included reference to people’s protected characteristics and staff described how they supported people, for example, to access their religious or spiritual support.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. People’s care plans including anticipatory plans, which had been completed with the GP. These gave information about people’s choices and preferences regarding future treatment and hospital admission. These plans were reviewed regularly. Staff were aware of people’s choices and had received training to support people at the end of their lives.