Westgarth

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.This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Staff demonstrated person-centred approaches when supporting people with their individual needs and activities. Care records had some detailed personalised information. A particularly positive feature was the inclusion of a 'what is important to me' section, which captured what was important to the person in their own words. Some inconsistencies were noted in care records, however, the manager was aware of these and had already implemented changes to improve care records.

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 proactively with a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people received coordinated care and continuity of support.

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

The provider ensured information was available in a range of different formats to meet people’s communication needs, this included audio, braille, large print, easy read and Makaton. Communication support plans detailed people’s preferred method of communication and identified any aids required

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas about their care, treatment and support.

Relatives we spoke with told us they were not routinely asked to provide feedback following their family member's stay. Some relatives also felt they were not always kept fully informed. One relative told us, 'They talk to me all the way through [family member's stay] and if there are any concerns they ring me.' In contrast, another relative said, 'They spoke to me and told me [family member] had done well over the weekend. They give little bits of information, but not in depth.'

The manager was taking action to increase opportunities for people and their relatives to share feedback about the service. Quarterly family, parent and carers' meetings were scheduled to commence in November 2026. The manager also operated an open-door policy and met with people and their families during assessments and care plan reviews.

There was a system in place to respond to any concerns and complaints. Records showed appropriate and timely action had been taken in response to complaints and feedback provided to the complainant.

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

Reasonable adjustments were made to meet individual needs, and flexible approaches ensured people could access care in ways that suited their preferences.

Staff received training in equality, diversity and inclusion and used this knowledge to ensure people did not experience discrimination and their rights under the Equality Act 2010 were respected. People had equal access to care, support and treatment. Protocols were in place so people and staff knew what to do in an emergency.

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.

The manager and staff team worked together to maintain people’s overall quality of life during their stay at the service. For example, accessing activities in the community and at the service, accessing health services and maintaining relationships with family and friends. People received personalised care and reasonable adjustments were in place to support equity in experience and outcomes.

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.

The manager promoted a culture where planning for the future was seen as an important part of personalised care. Emergency arrangements such as do not resuscitate (DNAR) and advanced wishes were discussed as part of the pre-admission process. The manager was aware some people and relatives may be reluctant to discuss end-of-life care as many people using the service were young. Conversations with people were approached sensitively and respectfully. End of life care plans were not completed however, the manager said they would ensure people’s wishes were clearly documented, even when they preferred not to engage in detailed discussions about end‑of‑life planning.

One person had experienced a recent bereavement and was receiving support from staff and a specialist healthcare professional, which they said was helpful.