Westminster 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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered 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. Staff consistently demonstrated a deep understanding of person-centred care and were exceptional in the way they supported people to live meaningful, independent lives.

We observed fantastic, natural and empowering interactions between staff and people, where individuals were clearly at the centre of everything that happened in the home. For example, one person was painting a Christmas tree and, while doing so, they were chatting with staff about their plans for the day. Staff spoke calmly and warmly, allowing the person time to communicate in their own way.

Another person was preparing to make their snacks. Staff encouraged them to wash their hands and wear an apron and hat for hygiene. Both the staff member and the person enjoyed the activity, taking their time as they worked together.

The service provided exceptional, person-centred care that placed people firmly at the heart of their home. Staff promoted choice and independence, supporting people to make decisions, take an active role in the running of their home, and influence how their support was delivered.

Staff knew people exceptionally well and understood their needs, preferences and communication styles. Care plans contained detailed information about people’s histories, interests and what mattered most to them. The registered manager worked closely with families and people themselves to continuously develop and personalise care plans as relationships and understanding grew. Plans were reviewed regularly, ensuring people remained fully involved and empowered in decisions about their care and support.

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.

Staff supported people to get in contact with health professionals if this was necessary. People were actively supported to be a part of their community and to follow their interests outside of the service. People had a consistent staff team who had worked at the service for extended periods of time to help promote continuity of care.

Continuity of people’s care resulted from staff working consistently and meeting their assessed needs. Effective partnership working with external agencies meant that care was delivered effectively, and people’s health care needs were responded to. One professional said, “I have observed provider’s staff working with clients on various occasions, and they are skilled in communicating with clients, providing adequate levels of prompting, and implementing guidance effectively.” Another professional said, “I have consistently found the working relationships with the service to be collaborative, supportive and conducive to providing the best care for [person]. The proactive approach and open communication has been very helpful.” Relatives confirmed health professionals were involved in a timely way. One relative said, “They [staff] tell me if my relative is unwell or if they have arranged an appointment.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Staff were exceptionally well trained and knowledgeable about how to support people with different communication need such as using signs or objects to help them communicate.

People using the service had different and very specific communication methods and needed intensive support to help them understand their day to day lives and how they would be spending their time. Some people needed symbols, pictures and photographs to help support them with this. Staff had fully understood and supported this, producing detailed timetables for people using symbols and photographs, often of the person taking part in the activity themselves. This had enabled people to fully understand what was happening throughout the day and feel fully prepared and in control of what was happening next.

The management and staff team had fully supported people’s different communication needs. They had developed separate detailed care plans about people’s communication and about how people liked to spend their time. These used pictures to detail how best to support people in these areas. These were of an excellent quality both in relation to how they guided staff to support people and also in how they were used to support discussions and understanding with people about how they were being supported.

Around the service there were numerous easy-read accessible documents and pictures. In the kitchen there were pictures of meals that were easily accessible to people at all times to help them make choices about what to cook and eat.

Relatives told us the management and staff communicated with them regularly. One relative said, ‘‘Communication is excellent, and we always get updated, even about the simple things.’’

Information about people that was collected and shared met data protection legislation requirements. Staff received GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) training. Information was stored securely within the site office in locked cabinets, while electronic information was protected within password protected care systems.

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.

Relatives told us they felt comfortable raising any concerns about their family member’s care and were confident they would be listened to. Feedback was actively encouraged from people, relatives, and staff. Regular house meetings were held where people discussed topics such as the running of the home, activities, and meals. Staff used pictorial aids and simple language to help people understand and engage in the discussions. Actions from previous meetings were shared so people could see the progress made and feel assured that their views were listened to and acted upon.

People’s relatives were very complimentary about the care staff and the promotion of people’s and their relative’s involvement. One relative told us, “We are very involved in the home, always welcomed and would highly recommend them. You are listened to and your opinions matter.”

We heard examples of how staff knew people really well and ensured that occasions were celebrated in the way that people chose and that was important to them. For example, people were encouraged and supported to celebrate key dates throughout the year including, resident’s birthday, Diwali, Eid and Christmas.A staff member said, “We often have events like this. People love to get involved. We also celebrate birthdays with cake.” One professional said, “Staff support [person] to attend family celebrations such as meals out for Eid and celebrate these events in home for [person].”

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

People were able to access healthcare, treatment and support when they needed it. The provider ensured that timely referrals were made for specialist support, while people could regularly access local health support when they required it.

People care and treatment was accessible, in line with best practice, quality standards and legal requirements, including those on equality and human rights. This included making reasonable adjustments for people with learning disabilities, addressing communication barriers and having accessible premises.

People’s relatives confirmed they were also kept up to date by staff on any changes in their family member ‘s health and wellbeing including informed of any incidents and accidents. One relative told us, “The staff keep us informed and updated on anything that happens and if there are any concerns.” One professional said, “Home manager ensures that [person’s] parents are updated on all of his needs and ensures that his mother is supported to attend his health appointment when she can.”

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.

SOFI demonstrated that people’s preferences and needs were being met, resulting in positive outcomes. We observed that individuals had their preferences and personal goals recorded and supported in practice. People were going out for the day to enjoy activities of their choosing. For example, each person had their own timetable outlining the structured activities they wished to take part in. If someone did not want to participate in a planned activity, staff offered alternative options such as shopping, playing games, or watching TV.

The service demonstrated a positive culture where staff recognised and challenged inequalities, working to remove barriers people faced. Staff showed a strong understanding of the potential inequalities people in the service may encounter and consistently supported them to access appropriate healthcare and other services. They acted as advocates when required, helping to overcome communication barriers and ensuring people received accessible person-centred care.

The provider had systems and processes in place, including an easy read equality, diversity, and inclusion policy. The provider had a clear complaints policy and procedures. Records showed concerns or complaints were followed up and responded to, so that people were informed of the outcome. Systems to gather feedback, such as regular meetings and surveys were also carried out.

The manager acknowledged the reluctance of some younger adults with learning disabilities and their loved ones in discussing end of life support. Although no one at the service was nearing the end of their life, staff supported people to set personal goals and make plans for their future. Plans were in place that reflected people’s aspirations and outlined how these goals would be achieved.