Whitehaven Residential Home

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.
 

This service scored 71 (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 made sure people’s care was person-centred.

Staff were able to access people's care plans and daily records on the provider’s electronic care planning system. Overall, these contained sufficient details to guide staff about people's needs, preferences and choices including those related to their protected characteristics, such as age or disability.

Although only 1 member of staff had completed training in how to work in a person centred way. We saw people’s care delivery was focused on them and involved them as individuals. People’s wishes and preferences about their care were known and respected by staff.

Staff were attentive to people’s individual needs and responded sensitively to their moods and preferences. For example, when one person spoke firmly to a carer who had entered their bedroom, the staff member responded calmly and respectfully, saying they would return later. We saw later the person had been gently supported to get up and join the others in the lounge. A staff member said, “I have worked in lots of homes and this one is very person-centred.”
 

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.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People were not provided with information about the day’s meals in a pictorial format if required. We saw the menu displayed on the first day did not reflect the meal people were served. We spoke with the provider who was aware of the need to ensure people were provided with up to date information that met their needs. They advised they had been working on the menus and would be taking pictures of them.

However, there was a service user guide and the provider's statement of purpose both of which provided people with information about the service and their rights. There was a monthly newsletter which was published both on the provider’s website and sent to relatives to inform them of events at the home.

People's care plans detailed their communication needs and met the Accessible Information Standards (AIS). People could be provided with information in large fonts or easy read guides. We saw staff communicating with people in ways which met their individual needs. There was information displayed to orientate people regards the day of the week and the date.
 

The provider welcomed people’s feedback and ideas about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care.

The provider’s statement of purpose and service user guide provided both people and relatives with details of how to raise any complaints. Information was also provided about how to share any feedback about the care provided with the Care quality Commission (CQC).

The provider told us there were not currently any residents meetings or surveys for people, as they lacked the capacity to participate or complete them. However, we heard staff consistently consult people about their day to day wishes. Relatives felt they could raise any issues with the provider if required.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People's care plans detailed their needs and any reasonable adjustments required to meet them. For example, people’s care plans noted their mobility and sensory needs and how these were to be met. People were placed in bedrooms according to their care needs and moved if there was a change in the level of their care needs.

The home was physically accessible and any adapted equipment people required was provided. The service user guide noted the home was not purpose built but adapted from a domestic dwelling. This meant opportunities for people living with dementia who needed to walk and explore internally were more limited. However, the provider was making the external path wider to make external access easier for people who used a wheelchair or frame.
 

Staff and leaders listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The provider’s commitment to equality, diversity and human rights was set out in their statement of purpose and policy. Staff had completed training in this, mental health and dementia care, as most people supported were living with dementia.

People's care plans noted their protected characteristics and the adjustments made to support equity in their experience and outcomes. For 1 person there was evidence in trying to understand their current behaviours, consideration had been given to their personality before they developed dementia and how this impacted and influenced their current presentation. Staff were guided to support the person in a manner which reflected their personal needs and schedule as opposed to staff’s.
 

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People's care plans showed their future wishes about their care had been discussed with those who were important to them, which a relative confirmed. People approaching the end of their lives had an advance care plan which outlined their preferences and wishes regarding their care. People nearing the end of their life had anticipatory medicines if required to manage any symptoms.

Most staff were up to date with their end of life care training and had access to the provider’s guidance.