Archived: Westmead Elderly Resource Centre

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Systems were in place to make sure staff reported accidents and incidents, complaints and other concerns and action was taken when required. The provider had suitable procedures to manage emergencies. Staff had received the necessary training to respond to emergencies and were aware of the relevant contacts for help and support.

The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and followed these procedures correctly when needed.

There were adequate numbers of staff to meet people's needs at all times. Staff were suitably skilled and qualified to fulfil their roles and care staff received updates to their training on a regular basis.

Is the service effective?

People using the service experienced personalised care which was planned and scheduled to meet their needs and minimise any risks to their health and well-being. Specialist dietary, medical and other needs and preferences had been identified in care plans where required. People using the service and their relatives were involved in the development and agreement of their care. Daily records were maintained to ensure the care delivered reflected the care plan and allowed the provider to identify concerns or changes to people's needs enabling them to respond promptly.

The provider had a range of measures to ensure people using the service received adequate food and hydration and there were arrangements in place to plan and supply a varied and nutritious diet. Nutritional status was monitored by staff to ensure weight and body mass index were maintained and there was access to input from dieticians when necessary. Measures were in place to monitor food and fluid intake more closely where there were concerns.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw care workers understood people's individual needs and limitations and communicated with them in an appropriate manner. People requiring individual attention had their care and support scheduled to meet their needs.

People using the service and their relatives completed an annual satisfaction survey. The latest report showed a good level of satisfaction with the care provided.

People we spoke with and their relatives were happy with the care and support they experienced. A family member of one person told us, 'The staff communicate with people very well and encourage them to do things.' Another relative commented, 'We're really pleased with the care, it's a very conducive atmosphere and there's plenty of interaction.'

Is the service responsive?

Care needs had been reviewed on a monthly basis and any changes were reflected in their care plan. Records showed the care delivered reflected the current care plan and relatives were informed of updates and changes to the well-being of their family members and the care provided.

There was a program of activities and entertainment organised to help to keep people involved in the daily life of the home and interact with others.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. They had access to complaints and compliments books where they could make comments and informal complaints were also recorded. We looked at how one complaint had been dealt with, and found the responses had been open, thorough, and timely. People could therefore be assured complaints were investigated and actions were taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had a variety of systems to monitor the quality of service provided and audit their performance. People using the service and their relatives had regular opportunities to provide feedback on their care and express their views. There were appropriate procedures for dealing with complaints and reporting accidents and incidents.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed monthly. If a review was needed in between this would be done. New residents care plans were reassessed six weeks after they moved in to ensure their needs had been assessed accurately and to see how they had settled in. People were involved in planning and their desires and preferences were documented. Where relevant details of relatives involvement was documented.

The provider responded appropriately to any allegation of abuse. The provider showed us records of all incidents of allegations of abuse over the past year. All cases had been dealt with in line with the Councils safeguarding investigation procedures and reported to other appropriate authorities.

Staff were positive about the service. They were suitably qualified and had good knowledge of the needs of people in the service. They had received appropriate training and received regular supervision.

The service had a complaints and compliments log. They held monthly residents meetings and quarterly forum for friends and relatives of residents.

There were sufficient staff to meet the needs of people, both to provide personal care and to assist with eating and drinking when needed. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed and updated as needs changed. People and their representatives were involved in making decisions about care and treatment.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Staff understood about different types of abuse and acted appropriately with their local authority partners when necessary.