Windward House

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

The service was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to consent. The new management of the service had ensured the service was now being delivered effectively and this regulation was now complied with.

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 service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

At our previous assessment peoples’ care plans were not up to date, accurate or complete following the transfer of care planning onto the provider’s IT system, the inaccuracies inherited from the previous care planning system. At this assessment we found care plans were now comprehensive and thorough, covering all aspects of people’s care. Where people had complex needs the care planning was detailed, covering for example, use of equipment to aid mobility, and all aspects of their personal care.

People and their relatives were involved in their care planning, and the service took care to communicate care information so people knew about the information in their care plans. One person said, “They read my care plan to me, so I was able to input towards my care.” Another person said, “My care plan was discussed with me before I came in. My daughter deals with things now.”

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

At the last assessment some parts of the provision of care were not safe. For example, using wheelchairs without footplates in place to keep peoples’ feet from being injured. Tissue viability pressure mattresses had not been correctly set and checks of the pressure settings of pressure mattresses had not been carried out. These issues had been dealt with by the changes made in the service.

The service held flash meetings in the late morning most days so all departments could exchange information about people’s changing needs. Staff made timely decisions on how best to improve peoples’ care to meet their needs. For example, by taking immediate action when people needed their diet to be fortified with additional fats and sugars to prevent weight loss.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

The service had experienced some changes of care staff in recent months and several new care staff had entered the staff team. Some were experienced and some were new to working in care. The new staff team was working well together to meet peoples’ needs.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Some people’s food and drink intake was being care planned and recorded to ensure their health was protected. Peoples’ food and fluid chart recording was now comprehensive and thorough. To support peoples’ nutrition, a snack trolley holding a selection of cakes, biscuits, fruits and drinks circulated at 11.00am and 3.00pm every day. There was also a snack station with a similar selection of food located in the main lounge which people could access when they wanted to.

People said the quality of the food at the service was good. People’s personal preferences were considered so people were offered food they liked. For example, one person said, “I always go downstairs for lunch. The food is impressive, there is a nice choice. If you want something else it’s not a problem.”

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

At the last assessment care for people’s skin pressure areas was a concern. The new management of the home had successfully overcome this issue and skin viability was now well managed by the service.

Shift handover meetings took place routinely supporting the effective transfer of information about peoples’ changing needs. One of the managers was attending each handover meeting to ensure all care staff and the management team were aware of all information about people’s needs.

There was now a good level of organised social and stimulating activity taking place in the home and there was a programme of structured activities.

The wall between the previous dining room and a substantial office room had been removed since the last assessment increasing the size of the dining area. This area now allowed many more people to have meals together sociably. For example, one person raised a glass of wine up to us when we were in the dining room during lunchtime. This had improved the mealtime experience of people.

The new registered manager had made a priority of improving the activity and social atmosphere in the home. For example, they had made good links with the local dementia community service, being the first care home in Devon to use their reminiscence (memory) box in September 2025 for a week of activity. These sessions were well attended by a group of people with mixed abilities, were reported as highly enjoyed, and led by people at the service. When the local steam train runs in March 2026 it is planned people will be given the opportunity to go on the Dementia Steam Train.

The service had begun to provide good quality activities for people with dementia at different stages. For example, the service now had their own sensory box where people could touch, see and hear items to give them stimulation and enjoyment.

The provider did not always fully support people who did not have capacity to have their legal rights around consent observed and recorded. The service told people who had the mental capacity to consent, about their rights and respected these when delivering person centred care and treatment.

Many of the people that lived in the care home lived with dementia and lacked the capacity to consent. We saw people’s lack of capacity was now fully considered in the delivery of their care.

There was some restrictive safety equipment in place to ensure peoples’ safety and wellbeing. For example, an infrared sensor beam was being used to indicate to staff when a person was moving from their bed. In another example, there was a newly fitted locked gate at the bottom of the stairs to prevent people without capacity going up the stairs. These were appropriately in place to ensure people were kept safe. However, they had not been agreed and recorded for each person affected, through a Best Interests process. The registered manager confirmed they would do this.

The registered manager was aware of the elements of providing a dementia friendly environment, for example suitable signage and non-patterned carpets where required. However, the registered manager and the service had not yet had time to implement these changes. There was a garden area outside the building that had been secured to keep people safe but was to be further developed as a sensory space, supportive and stimulating to people when they were enjoying fresh air and outside space.