Bridge House (Somerset)

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. The service’s initial assessment involved meeting with the person and relatives and discussing the support required. This included personal care needs, communication, daily living skills, social skills and relationships, expressing sexuality, interests and hobbies, education and employment, religious, spiritual and cultural needs. A compatibility assessment was also completed before a person first moved to the service. Each person had recently had an up to date assessment in preparation for the service to start using a new electronic care planning system.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people with their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. However, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), which provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves, was not always being followed. We found 1 instance where an appropriate decision specific mental capacity assessment and best interest decision was not in place for a restriction within the home. This meant the service was unable to demonstrate if a restriction was the least restrictive option and in people’s best interest. During the assessment the registered manager took action to address this.

Staff knew the importance of seeking consent. Throughout our visits we observed people being asked their consent before support was provided.

Staff told us they knew people well and understood their communication needs.