London Care (Bristol Court)

“There were 91 flats at Bristol Court extra care scheme. There was a specialist unit for people living dementia (12 flats) and 15 flats dedicated for people with a learning disability. There were communal areas in different parts of the building.”

“ ”

“Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC onlyinspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our assessment, 25 people were supported with personal care.”

“ ”

“The assessment included 2 visits to the service on 21 and 22 August 2025. The last rating for the service was requires improvement (published 3 July 2024). At the last assessment, we identified breaches of legal regulations relating to dignity and respect, safeguarding people from abuse and good governance. This assessment was planned to judge whether the provider had made improvements. We found that they had, and they were no longer breaching any legal regulations. The rating changed to good.”

“We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.”

“The provider demonstrated they were meeting the principles of Right culture, right care, right support. Staff supported people to be independent and make choices about their lives. People had opportunities to form and develop relationships with others. People were supported to access a range of activities and facilities in the local community.”

“Staff assessed risks to people’s safety and wellbeing. People received their medicines in a safe way. People lived in a safe environment.”

“There were enough staff to support people and meet their needs. Staff undertook a range of training. Staff felt well supported.”

“There were effective systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service. Staff learnt when things went wrong. There were opportunities for people using the service and other stakeholders to contribute their views.”