Westwolds

Updated 3 March 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Westwolds is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection and we sought feedback from the local authority care commissioners who had carried out a quality audit visit at the service in January 2020. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with eight members of staff including care workers, activity worker, maintenance worker, deputy manager, registered manager, a director, and the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We observed staff interactions with people throughout the inspection.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. The provider sent us information about improvement actions they had taken immediately following the inspection.

Updated 3 March 2020

About the service

Westwold is a residential care home providing personal care to 32 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service operated in a purpose designed building and specialised in supporting older people, and people who are living with dementia. The care home can support up to 34 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People lived in a care home that was generally clean and well maintained. However, we found two showers could potentially exceed safe temperatures and some radiators had surface temperatures likely to cause people to be burned if they accidentally fell against them. The provider told us they would immediately resolve those issues.

The number of night staff was found to be slightly fewer than the provider had assessed was necessary; since more people had recently moved into the care home. We discussed that with the registered manager who immediately increased the number of night staff deployed.

Medicines were generally well managed. However, we found the recording of controlled drugs was not in line with best practice guidelines and the registered manager told us they would address that immediately. Care staff understood how to keep people safe from abuse and understood the systems for ensuring people were safeguarded.

People made choices about the care they received from staff and received care which met their needs. The registered manager had successfully increased staff awareness of early intervention to prevent pressure wounds, and no one living at the care home had pressure wounds. Where people could not make decisions for themselves, the provider had appropriate best interest decision making procedures in place. Care plans were generally comprehensive, and staff received the training necessary to carry out their duties; additional training was available to staff who wished to develop their role.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they enjoyed the food that was provided. Alternative options were readily available, and staff understood people’s preferences. People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported to access community-based health care services when they needed to. People were encouraged to personalise their bedrooms and lived in a purpose-built care home which met their housing needs.

People were supported by staff who treated them with kindness and compassion. The staff provided care in ways which maintained people’s privacy, dignity and supported them to maintain their independence where possible. Activity staff provided a range of activities and encouraged people to join in so that potential social isolation would be reduced.

People received care that was responsive to their needs. Staff treated people as individuals and understood their individual requirements and life histories. Information was provided in a range of formats, so people could understand it, and staff took time to explain things to people verbally when required. People’s contact with family and friends was encouraged and supported by the provider. A complaints procedure was in place, which people understood how to use. End of life care was provided in a compassionate manner by the care staff.

The management of the service supported people to achieve good outcomes from the care they received. The registered manager provided supportive leadership and was regarded as being approachable and person centred. The provider recognised, and rewarded, staff who went the extra mile when providing care for people. The registered manager understood their responsibilities for being open and honest when something went wrong; and ensured the necessary notifications were made to the CQC and other relevant authorities. The provider asked people, and their relatives and staff, for feedback on the service which was then used to make improvements when necessary.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published on 12 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.