Woolston 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 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 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 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.

Feedback from people and their relatives indicated staff knew them well and understood their likes and dislikes. A staff member said, “Everybody's preferences are different, we understand the people well.”

The provider supported people to communicate their needs and preferences. People’s care plans contained person-centred information, including ‘This is me’ information. The management team were working with staff to review and amend people’s care plans in partnership with them. One person told us they were currently reviewing their own plan and had noted some errors, which staff should be rectifying. Another person had been involved in training staff to understand and respond to their support needs.

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 worked with external professionals to ensure people’s health and wellbeing needs were met. We saw timely referrals had been made to professionals when required, such as to mental health professionals or speech and language therapists (SALT). An external advanced practitioner visited on a weekly basis and reviewed people’s health needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Staff were able to share information with people in a suitable way.

The provider had an accessible information and communication policy, and accessible formats were available, such as larger print or braille.

People’s communication and information needs were assessed on admission and recorded within their care plans. People and their relatives, where appropriate, had access to their care plans. Some people preferred to have information emailed to them directly, which staff supported. People had access to advocacy services and various people were supported by an advocate.

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.

A relative told us, “The staff listen to me, I feel that I can ask them anything.” People told us they were able to raise any concerns or give feedback. The provider promoted service user ambassador roles, and we spoke with an ambassador who attended service user forums, represented people’s views and involved people in the running of the service. We observed people leading discussions about plans for one of the communal areas.

Monthly service user meetings and quarterly family/friends’ meetings were held. Records demonstrated people were able to share feedback and make suggestions. Actions taken in response to feedback were displayed as ‘You said, we did’. The provider undertook various surveys, with the most recent results currently being analysed. The complaints procedure was displayed in the reception area and where complaints had been raised these had been dealt with appropriately. Compliments received were on display.

People held other roles such as being part of the activity team and part of the staff recruitment process. They were encouraged to help produce the provider’s regular newsletter.

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

People had access to a GP and an advanced practitioner visited weekly to review people’s health needs. However, we were informed access to the full enhanced GP support had been problematic. The primary care commissioning team were working with everyone involved to resolve this. People could access other services such as hairdressing and beauty therapy.

Outside areas were accessible and people had specialist equipment, such as specialist wheelchairs. One person had an adapted call bell to enable them to call for assistance independently. However, another person told us they were waiting for a pendant nurse call bell to be provided. The registered manager confirmed this had been ordered and further equipment options were further ordered for the person to trial.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Two units supported people living with dementia and we saw aspects of the environment could be made more dementia friendly, such as using contrasting paint colours. Work was in progress for the service to become accredited in dementia care and best practice, including changes to the living environment. People had access to a sensory room and outside spaces. The garden area had raised beds, where people enjoyed gardening.

The registered manager understood some people experienced barriers and provided examples where they advocated on behalf of people and supported good outcomes. They had supported one person to gain a holiday grant and to access education. Staff had also enabled others to take holidays, supporting with the planning and arrangements.

Staff could apply to become a ‘Sexuality Champion’, a role introduced to promote and encourage inclusivity around all aspects of people’s sexuality.

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.

Staff supported people to set goals and reviewed their progress. We saw examples where people had made progress and were making future plans, such as moving out of the home and into a community setting.

Staff undertook training in end-of life care. People’s care plans were developed and reviewed with them in line with their wishes and preferences. Information about people’s resuscitation status was included within their care plans.