The Well House

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 good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People were put at the centre of any support and care. They were consulted and encouraged to share their views on how care was to be delivered. Relatives told us they felt included and had the opportunity to be involved in decisions as appropriate. One relative said, “The staff meet his needs well and let us know anything that is going on. They are in regular contact which we appreciate.”

Staff and relatives told us people were able to express their views even if they could not verbalise, they used gestures and expressions. One relative told us, “We know they are happy to go to The Well House as they are always keen to get out of the car and get inside.”

Staff told us it was important to respond to what people want and to be person centred. One told us, “X has started asking for extra personal care support and she was in control of when she asked for this.” Another said, “Knowing the clients and doing what they want is vital understanding what they want and what they need. Some need more encouragement, so everything is tailored for each person.”

Visiting professionals were confident that staff followed a person-centred approach for each person and commented on how this was led by the managers.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff worked very closely with a range of health and social care professionals and fostered an inclusive approach for the benefit of people. This included community health care professionals who visit W the service regularly to provide care support and advice. For example, the district nursing team who supported appropriate wound care, and community pharmacist who reviews the medication. Another visiting professional was complimentary about staff and said, “I have the honour and privilege to be the nurse from the GP practice that attends to complete the annual health check reviews.”

Staff told us that they also worked alongside families and always informed families of any appointments and kept a record of the appointment and advice given.
 

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Care records were not up to date. The managers were working on transferring all information onto a computer system. However, this system was not useable and therefore information supplied to staff in written form was not up to date. Staff knew people well and discussed their needs verbally on a regular basis. The registered manager was aware of this issue and was working to ensure the new system was operational.

People had different communication styles and abilities, and these were well known to staff. People were able to express themselves and staff took time to understand them. Staff described the different ways people communicated. One said, “When you spend time with X you get to understand what each sound they make means.” Some people used Makaton and others used gestures. Another staff member said, “You can always work it out and understand what people want to say.”

A relative told us, “X uses some Makaton, they can take you and show you things, staff take time to understand them.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Observations confirmed staff were listened to and given the opportunity regularly to share their views. Staff consulted people about all aspects of their care, possible activity and entertainment. A person told us about a concern at college; this was immediately responded to by staff. They spoke in private to them giving them plenty of time to raise and explain any concern they had. This was then raised with the registered manager to follow up and action as necessary.

A relative told us about concerns they had raised recently with the deputy manager. They were satisfied that these had been listened to and responded to effectively. They told us, “I’m very impressed and confident that if I continue to deal with the deputy manager whenever there’s an issue then it will get dealt with.” Another told us a concern they raised was fully investigated and responded to effectively. “They took it all very seriously and looked into it thoroughly.”

Although there was evidence to support the effective management of how concerns were raised and that they were responded to and dealt with effectively. Systems to record were not well defined and the complaints procedure was not being followed. This was raised with the registered manager who agreed the complaints procedure would be reviewed and updated to support a clear and effective procedure to follow.

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

Staff had completed training on equality and diversity and recognised the importance of supporting people with their health and welfare needs. Staff supported appropriate access to health and social care professionals which meant that they received the best and most appropriate care and support when required. We spoke with professionals who confirmed that there were good lines of communication to support this approach. One told us, “They work with other professionals to ensure needs are met.”

Most of the accommodation was not purpose built but staff worked in creative ways to ensure people had access to the care and support they needed. For example, a relative told us, “X is blind, and they always allocate to them the same room opposite the dining room, where they can hear everyone and find their way around easily to the lounge, dining room and quiet room.”Staff explained the use of rooms depended on people’s individual needs and the size and facilities available.

Staff and leaders actively 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.

Peoples likes and interests were well known and used to stimulate people and ensured they engaged in a full life. Staffing numbers and allocation were tailored to support people. This included 1 to 1 time for individual support with a focus on supporting people’s well-being.

People were supported within the service with a variety of entertainment and engagement with staff and each other. They also went out and about on trips and excursions.

A relative said, “They get out and about and they make sure they go where they want, they particularly like McDonalds and they go to a local day centre.” A visiting professional told us, “The people they support access the community by going to the day centre, college, lunch out, shopping etc, there is a vehicle to support community access.”

Staff are conscious that people should be able to go anywhere without any restrictions. One person was talking about going to London to visit their family and the registered manager told us they were applying for suitable transport.

Staff worked with outside services and resources to ensure people felt included. Staff told us they had formed a positive link with a local pub that was frequented. Staff said, “People like the local pub staff know them and call them by their names, we are made to feel very welcome.”

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.

No one staying at the service required end of life care. However, a person who had lived at the service for many years had passed away recently. Staff had worked closely with their family and health care professionals to ensure their death was personal and took account of their wishes. Their key worker had been with them, and his favourite music was being played when they died. Staff had talked to people about their death and had been involved with a memorial ceremony held in the garden.

Some discussions had taken place around planning for the future and relatives were involved in these. ReSPECT (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) forms had been used to start conversations and record any decisions made.