Westroyd Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This is the first assessment for this service since it was registered under the new provider. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We found a person’s care records used terminology, which was not respectful, kind or compassionate. For example, their records included phrases such as ‘verbally and physically aggressive’, ‘very selfish’ and ‘arrogant’. The senior management team and registered manager accepted such terminology was not appropriate and said they would provide further support and guidance for staff in how to record information appropriately. They told us the senior management team were investing in staff training to increase their knowledge and understanding, which included their dementia strategy.

A family member shared a positive example of how staff had responded to their relative. They told us how their relative had become distressed whilst out with them, and how staff provided support when they returned. They said, “When we got back a staff member treated [person] in a lovely compassionate way, which calmed them down.”

People and most family members told us staff treated them with kindness, compassion and dignity. A person told us, “I think they are all quite kind and respectful.” A second person said, “The staff are very kind, they treat me with dignity. When I have a shower, they cover me with towels.” A family member said, “Staff are all very kind.” However, another family member said, “The other day [person] was wearing someone else’s trousers and their top had food spilt on it, they look scruffy at times.”

We observed positive and caring interactions between all staff towards the people in residence, with staff referring to people by name.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s views as to whether their personal, cultural, social and religious needs were met were mixed. A person told us, “Some days we do games and jigsaws. My family have taken me out, but not the staff from the home.” A second person said, “We don’t go out anywhere, no church service or anything like that.”

A few family members were aware of activities such as bingo and board games; however, they said these mainly involved those people who were able to participate. A family member said, “My only criticism is the activities. The activity person does things with people who can, otherwise they all just sit around.”

A majority of family members spoke of the lack of social events and activities within the service and of the impact on their relative’s day to day life. A family member told us, “Activities are very poor, there’s nothing going on. They don’t ever go out, and religious needs aren’t met.” A second family member said, “[Person] colours, and plays snakes and ladders. I haven’t seen anything else. They’ve never been out with the home.” Family members shared how their relative spent their time sitting in the lounge. They told us, “My [person] just sits in a chair in the day room and is bored.” Some family members told us staff encouraged their relative to take part in activities, however, they declined to do so.

A few family members were positive about activities. A family member told us, “There is a Church meeting on a Sunday, and school children come in sometimes.” Another family member told us, “They did arrange for a Catholic minister to come in and give Communion every Sunday.” A third family member told us, “They knit, take part in card games, and someone comes and sings at weekends, I think there’s enough activities.”

In the morning, we saw 3 people sitting with the activity playing board games.

Staff told us they supported and encouraged people to take part in activities when they had the time to do so. They told us the number of staff employed to provide activities had decreased from 2 to 1. Staff confirmed people had limited opportunities to go out, unless taken by their relatives.

The registered manager and senior management team acknowledged improvements were needed, and that positive steps were being made to improve people’s day to day experience of living at the service, which included organising a boat trip.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People told us staff treated them as an individual, with their needs and preferences met. A person told us, “Staff come in and say, ‘time to get up’. I had a shower this morning, they asked me about 6.15am, it was the night staff. It was okay.” A second person said, “If I want to go to bed, then I do. Staff don’t tell me not to.”

Family members had differing views as to whether their relative was able to have choice about aspects of their care. A family member said, “Staff are caring, but it’s a bit regimented. Sometimes [person] doesn’t want to get up, and they are told to. I have visited at 7pm and [person] is in bed; they complain that it’s a bit too early.” A second family member said, “I think [person] goes to bed when they want, they have said staff wake them at around 5am to get up.”

People’s care records included information as to the tasks they could undertake themselves, and people spoke of their independence. A person said, “I get up and dress myself.”

Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of people’s needs, likes and dislikes and personal backgrounds and said this helped them to look after the person and see them as an individual.

A staff member told us, “I always try and encourage people to do what they can. This may be standing with support, washing hands and face and putting on clothes where possible, brushing hair and teeth.”

The senior management team and registered manager told us since purchasing the service they had worked with and supported staff, through training and guidance to work in a person-centred way. They acknowledged many of the staff had worked at the service for many years, and changes to working practices took time to evolve. We would have expected improvements to the culture of the service to have been embedded given the provider had purchased the service 2 years ago.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff were seen to be attentive and responsive to people’s needs, assisting people with wheelchairs and mobility where required. People sitting in communal areas called out for assistance, whilst call bells were used by people who were in their bedroom. A person told us, “I have a call bell on the wall, staff come very quickly if I call them.”

Several family members told us they were aware that on occasions their relative became anxious or distressed, due to their health needs, which included dementia and mental health. They were aware the challenges this placed on staff, and expressed confidence that staff were able to respond and meet their relatives needs when they were upset. A family member told us, “My [person] can be challenging, but they know how to treat them.” Another family member said, “Staff talk to [person] in a very kind manner, my relative can shout at staff at times, but they respond kindly.”

Audits were undertaken of staffs’ response to call bells, enabling the management team to identify any delays and ensure staff responded appropriately. People in some instances were routinely checked at regular intervals based on their individual needs.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff generally said they felt valued by seniors and the management team. They said they were thanked and appreciated. Staff said their well-being was considered and that they were treated fairly

The registered manager told us staff were supported through supervision and appraisal, and flexible rotas enabled staff to attend health appointments. They told us they had an open-door policy to enable staff to discuss any concerns.