Walsingham 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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (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 told us they liked living at the home because they were happy with their lives and with the care and support received. Relatives felt their loved one’s care was person-centred, and this was a part of the culture of the home, achieved by staff putting people at the centre of what was happening in the home.

People’s plans of care were person-centred and included their likes and dislikes. They gave staff information on how people wished to be supported in all aspects of their care and staff knew people very well. People were involved in the review of their care, as much as they wished to be. Staff and relatives also contributed to reviews of people’s care.

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.

The registered manager role modelled to staff the importance of people being supported to lead the lives they wished. One person told us, “The manager tells me it’s your home and your life, how would you like things to happen. I really like it here.” Staff supported people to maintain important relationships with relatives. During our visit, staff were supporting 1 person to visit their relative at their home, this involved using the home’s transport. A staff member told us, “We have staff who are drivers and that is really good as it helps us support people to visit their relatives and get out and about in the community doing things they enjoy. Today [name] is going to the hairdressers."

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

People’s communication needs had been assessed and reviewed whenever needed. Information was available to people in pictorial formats, to aid their understanding. For example, cutlery and crockery picture images were displayed in the kitchen to help 1 person locate items they may need, which also promoted their independence.

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.

Monthly key worker feedback meetings took place with people. These individual meetings gave people the opportunity to discuss their care, what they felt was going well and any changes they would like to see happen. Staff understood the importance of communicating with people in a way that met their needs, and this enabled people to share their feedback on the service.

The provider welcomed feedback from people, including any complaints they may have. People were frequently asked if they had any complaint about the service and people had said not and confirmed this to us. Relatives knew who to contact in the event of needing to complain but told us they had no complaints.

The provider offered relatives a feedback survey, but only 1 questionnaire had been returned; this contained positive feedback. Relatives felt they were able to talk with staff and give feedback on an ongoing basis rather than await surveys.

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

Staff gave us examples of when they had supported people to appointments or sought guidance from healthcare professionals. For example, some people had a catheter in place, and 1 staff member told us, “[Name] has had some issues with their catheter, so we made sure we knew exactly what to do, the district nurse has been supportive with this.”

Staff understood the importance of adapting care so people’s protected characteristics relating to their disabilities, preferences and well-being needs were met.

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 registered manager told us about how they had advocated for 1 person who had lived at the home. They (the registered manager) explained they had not felt the person’s needs were being met in a specific healthcare setting, outside of the service, and this person had been unable to speak up for themselves.

Relatives felt their loved ones, who lived at the home, had a good quality of life and their care and support met their individual needs. Relatives told us they felt care staff consistently advocated on behalf of their loved ones and ensured their wider needs were met.

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 were offered the opportunity to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. The service did not specialise in or offer end of life care. However, staff told us they tried to gain information about people’s future wishes and care plans reflected this. Staff said they would always work alongside healthcare professionals in doing their best for the person, whether this be supporting them in hospital or at home.