Bridge House (Somerset)

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The service had inclusive leaders who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support, and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager, deputy manager and provider. They felt able to raise any concerns and were confident they would be acted upon. Comments from staff included, “[Name of registered manager] is very proactive, straight but fair, I get on really well with them. I really like [Name of operations manager] you can have a good chat, they are approachable” and “If I had any concerns I would speak to [name of registered manager] they are really nice.”

Leaders embedded a culture that enabled individually designed support that embraced people’s human rights. This meant people were able to live a good, ordinary life as part of their community. The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensured people led confident, inclusive and empowered lives. People were treated with respect and dignity and staff treated people as equals.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The service had clear responsibilities, roles, and systems of accountability. There was a schedule of quality assurance systems which supported the management team’s review of the quality of the service delivery. Areas covered included, incidents and accidents, medicines, care plans, health and safety and staffing. The audits identified areas of improvement and had action plans; however, they had not identified some of the issues we had found with people’s medicines, the MCA and risk assessments.

The service was meeting the principles of right support, right care, right culture. People were supported to live the life they chose, with good access to local communities.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.