Bridlington Manor

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

Most people spoken with felt supported by staff who recognised their needs. Staff evidenced they respected people as individuals. However, people’s care plans did not celebrate or encourage their individuality. Records did not support that people were encouraged or involved as active participants in their care. They also failed to demonstrate opportunities were considered and sought for people to be part of their wider local community. Staff confirmed they did not have detail about what was important to or for people. Records of people’s individual communication styles were not in place.

This service scored 68 (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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Most people spoken with felt supported by staff who recognised their needs and care.

Staff spoken with were able to give us basic information about people and how they communicated. Whilst they evidenced they respected people as individuals, they confirmed they did not have detail about what was important to or for the person and there were no records kept of what people’s individual communication styles were.

People’s care plans did not celebrate or encourage their individuality. Records did not support that people were encouraged or involved in been active participants in their care. They did not provide information that opportunities were considered or sought for people to be part of their wider local community. For example, people’s records contained little, or no information on their social interests, hobbies’ strengths culture, religion, relationships or what was important to them.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.