Westfield Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Positive interactions were observed throughout the inspection and staff provided reassurance, encouragement and emotional support to people. One person told us the staff were "very kind and considerate". A relative said, “The care is absolutely brilliant, it’s personal. The staff have been there a long time, they know her history, her likes and dislikes.” Another told us, “They treat [Name] with respect, dignity, kindness and patience.” Relatives had written messages thanking staff for the "care, love and dignity" provided to their family members. People, staff and healthcare professionals consistently spoke positively about relationships within the home and staff attitudes.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff demonstrated knowledge of people's routines, interests and personal preferences including hobbies and personal wishes, which were reflected in care planning and observed practice. Staff adapted support around individual preferences, including, for example, arranging meals people liked and recognising specific choices such as a person preferring their toast cut into triangles. During the inspection staff ensured people's favourite foods, preferred activities and individual support needs were met. One relative told us, “Staff do little things for them,” and described how staff responded immediately when their family member requested ice cream.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The provider always encouraged people to maintain their independence, choice and control. Care records promoted choice in daily routines, meals, activities and personal care, and staff supported people to do as much as possible for themselves. One staff member explained, "We always prefer to promote what they can do themselves we don't want to take away their independence." People were offered choices about meals and activities, and support plans included guidance on gaining consent and encouraging involvement in decision-making.

The provider did not always respond effectively to people’s immediate needs. Relatives gave mixed feedback about how quickly staff responded when support was required. One relative told us, “When [Name] rings their bell, it’s not always answered in a timely manner.” Some other relatives described delays in staff responses at night. However, relatives also told us staff recognised when people became unwell and sought appropriate medical support. One relative said, “Staff were quite good at recognising [Name] was unwell and quite responsive to getting help.” Observations showed staff were attentive to people’s comfort, wellbeing and requests for support throughout the day.

We identified concerns about the consistency of monitoring and recording for people at risk of harm. Care records did not always demonstrate people received support as frequently as planned, and important information about risks and healthcare needs was not always easily accessible during the provider’s transition to an electronic care system. Healthcare professionals described staff as proactive in identifying deterioration and requesting support. Following the inspection, the provider introduced new risk alerts, escalation forms and auditing systems to strengthen oversight and ensure people’s changing needs were recognised and responded to promptly. However, these improvements were not yet embedded at the time of the inspection.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

The provider always supported staff wellbeing and enabled staff to carry out their roles effectively. Staff described leaders as approachable, supportive and responsive, and spoke positively about teamworking and the culture within the home. One staff member told us, "I don't come to work thinking ‘[Oh] I've got to come to work’." Another told us managers were always available for support and advice. Staff had access to supervision, training, wellbeing support and confidential helplines, and feedback from staff consistently described a positive and supportive working environment. One staff member said, “Every 6 weeks we sit down with the [registered] manager separately and they tell us what we've done well. They are very supportive.” Another member of staff said, “Feels like we are a good team.”