Wheldale Heights

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 service. This key question has been rated 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.

The registered manager and staff were committed to ensuring people were supported in an individualised way. People’s preferences and choices were consistently considered. People had personalised bedrooms and the environment was comfortable and inviting. Positive relationships between staff and people contributed to a relaxed, warm and welcoming atmosphere. Care records were reviewed and kept up to date, reflecting changes in people’s needs. This was done partnership with people and their relatives. Feedback included, “They discuss my care with me” and “They discuss [Name]’s care with us.”

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.

Systems and processes were in place to effectively support continuity of care and to ensure people had access to relevant health professionals. Staff understood people’s needs and appropriately made referrals to specialist services when required. People were supported to attend external appointments.

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

Information was readily available in a variety of formats suited to individual needs. For example, a welcome brochure which provided a wide range of relevant information about the service and was written in simple language with pictorial references. There were also display boards containing accurate and up to date information relating to the service, for people, relatives and staff to access. Signage throughout the service was clear and suited to the needs of people living there.

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.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people and relatives were involved and had opportunities to give feedback. The registered manager held regular engagement meetings and surveys were also provided. Following meetings or surveys, results were shared and actions implemented, to drive service improvement and improve people’s experience. There was an ‘Updates for families and friends’ board in place sharing survey results, action plans, family liaison contacts, and details of the next friends and family meeting. Complaints and concerns were managed appropriately.

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

People were supported to experience equality in the care they received. Staff understood the complex needs of people living at the service and worked hard to ensure the barriers they faced were removed. People had access to services such as podiatrists, dentists and opticians.

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.

People were given opportunities and choices to positively impact their experience. The registered manager and staff focussed on people’s quality of life and worked to provide the same opportunities as people who did not use services. One relative told us, “[Staff] engage to make the best quality of life they can for [Name]. [Name]’s behaviour has not stopped staff still taking them out and doing the things [Name] has liked. They have strategies in place.” People and relatives gave consistently positive feedback regarding their experience of care at the service. Comments included, “I am happy with the care here” and “I am alright here for the rest of my life.”

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’s wishes and future aspirations were consistently considered. Where needed, end of life care plans were in place. These were person-centred and reflected people’s wishes. One relative told us, “[Staff] communicate with us and they have discussed [Name]’s end of life wishes [with us].”