Archived: Winsford House

We found that people had expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We found people’s care and support needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. Staff understood people’s care and support needs and knew how to protect them from risk of harm. The provider had ensured people had a safe transition to their new homes. We found that the provider had reported faults and any repairs that required to the premises in a timely manner to the local authority. The manager told us that the local authority was responsible for maintaining the safety and suitability of the premises. We found that sometime there had been delays in attending to the premises maintenance issues. There was evidence that quality monitoring audits had taken place, and that learning from audits was taking place and necessary changes had been implemented.

All relatives we spoke with told us they were involved in the care planning and had been asked for their views on the service provided. People also told us their privacy was respected and they felt safe in the home.

We found that peoples care needs were being planned for. People’s risks had been assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure that the care delivered met their needs.

Staff understood people’s care needs and knew how to support them. Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by management staff to perform their roles adequately. The provider had systems in place to check that care was being provided safely and appropriately. However, these checks were not done regularly and issues or areas for improvement identified were not always followed-up, placing people at potential risk.