We carried out a review of the data available to us about Westholme on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Westholme, you can give feedback on this service.
Westholme is a residential care home providing care for seven people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to eight people with learning disabilities. Accommodation is provided in a large end of terrace house over three floors.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People had lived in the home for several years and were comfortable in their environment. The atmosphere in the home was calm and relaxed.
Effective arrangements were in place to keep people safe. No one had experienced an accident since the last inspection. People’s personal risks were well-managed and regular checks were carried out on the building. The provider carried out pre-employment checks on staff. Medicines were administered in a safe manner. The manager was open to learning lessons from audits to improve the service.
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 this practice.
The design and decoration of the home required improvement. The provider confirmed improvements would be made.
Staff were kind to people. People used nods and gestures to confirm they liked the staff. Staff reviewed people’s care with them at the end of every month to involve them in their care and promote their independence.
Care plans were very detailed and included people’s preferences and wishes. They were regularly reviewed. End-of-life plans were in place. The service had a complaints procedure. No complaints had been made since the last inspection. Care plans described people’s behaviour if they were expressing any dissatisfaction.
The registered manager and the staff worked in partnership with other professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff felt they could approach the manager to discuss any worries or concerns.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
The provider had recently introduced a new electronic system to monitor the quality of the service. The manager had begun to use the system and had identified actions to make improvements. The staff worked well with relatives and other professionals to support people’s care.
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 (report published 17 June 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.
We last inspected the service in April 2015 and rated the service as ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and met all the fundamental standards we inspected against.
People who used the service made complimentary statements about the standard of care provided. They told us they liked living at the home, liked the people they lived with and they got along with staff who were friendly and helped them. We observed positive interactions between staff and people who lived at the service. Staff treated people with dignity, compassion and respect and people were encouraged to be as independent as possible.
The premises were clean and regular maintenance and periodic refurbishment was taking place. Repairs were made quickly when these were required. Checks and tests had been carried out to ensure that the premises were safe.
There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the present needs of people using the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure and carried out background checks when they employed staff to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. There were robust procedures in place to make sure people were protected from abuse. Staff had received training about the actions they must take if they saw or suspected that abuse was taking place. The registered manager understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding people at the home.
People told us they were offered a selection of meals and there were always alternatives available. Each individual’s preference was catered for and people were supported to make their own meals if they preferred. Staff ensured their nutritional needs and tastes were met.
Staff training records were up to date and staff received regular supervisions, appraisals and training / development plans were also completed. This meant that staff were properly supported to provide care to people who used the service.
People were supported to take part in interesting and meaningful activities. The service supported people to have active, interesting and meaningful lifestyles. They took part in education, leisure and social events and staff were constantly looking for more opportunities for people to enjoy. The service supported people in their relationships with others outside the home and with the local and wider community links.
People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were always accompanied by staff to hospital appointments and emergencies.
People at the home were regularly asked for their views about the service and if there was anything they would like to improve. People we spoke with told us that they knew how to make a complaint, found the registered manager approachable and had no concerns about the service.
Medicines audits were carried out regularly by the registered manager and senior staff to make sure people received the treatment they needed.
The registered provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and was following the requirements in the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The registered manager and provider made regular checks to make sure the service was running as expected and took action where improvements were needed.
The registered provider was meeting the conditions of their registration. They were submitting notifications in line with legal requirements. They were displaying their previous CQC performance ratings at the service and on their website.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
We carried out this inspection on 7 January 2015 and it was unannounced.
Westholme provides care and support for up to eight people who have a learning disability. At the time of our inspection there were seven people living in the home. All those living in the home had their own bedrooms with ensuite shower rooms.
At the time of our inspection the home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the home is run.
We found the provider had policies and procedures in place for recognising and reporting abuse. We spoke with staff working in the home and found they were able to describe different types of abuse and how to report any concerns.
Care plans we looked at were person centred and contained appropriate risk assessments. Care plans were regularly reviewed with changes being made where required.
We saw the home was clean and tidy and the people who lived in the home were also well presented.
We saw the provider had a robust recruitment and selection process in place. We found appropriate pre-employment checks had been made including written references, Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, and evidence of identity had also been obtained.
The home had an appropriate medication policy in place. We saw staff who dispensed medicines had received training in the management and storage of medicines. We looked at the medication administration records (MAR) and found they were completed clearly and correctly.
Staff working in the home received regular supervisions and appraisals with records of discussions held recorded in their personal files.
There was a formal complaints procedure in place which was displayed in the home so it was visible to people who used or visited the home.
We saw some of the people in the home had access to advocacy services and information was available to show how these services could be accessed.
The provider had a quality assurance system in place which was used to ensure people who used the home received the best care.