Whitstable 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.At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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. At our last inspection people were not receiving person centred care, significant improvements had been made at this inspection. People were now involved as much as possible in developing their care plan and managing risk including non-verbal communication. For example, a person had been unable to find their room independently when they left the lounge. Staff observed the person and found they always turned in one direction when they left the lounge, which was the opposite direction from their room. Staff changed the person’s room to the other corridor, with a photo on the door. We observed the person going from the lounge to their room independently.

People were supported to take part in activities daily including the gardening club and crafts. Staff involved everyone as much as possible and made sure people who did not want to join in with group activities were supported with what they wanted to do. Families had been supported to hold celebrations at the service. A relative told us about a BBQ which had been held on the roof terrace, which the whole family had been able to attend.

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. At our last inspection we identified significant shortfalls in how staff responded to concerns and working with other professionals. The staff team had made improvements, which had impacted on the support people received.

People were referred to health professionals when their needs changed. Staff now followed the guidance provided and listened to people if they raised concerns. The local GP surgery had oversight of people’s medical needs and staff were working with them to meet people’s needs. People told us they had felt involved in making decisions about their care and their choices and preferences were considered.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The registered manager had made improvements in the way information was provided. There was now dementia friendly signage in the service, and additional photos had been added to the corridors to assist people to find their way around the service.

People received information in the way they preferred. People’s care plans included their communications needs and staff understood these. We observed staff communicating with people in the way they preferred.

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. At our last inspection, people did not feel involved in the service. People and relatives were more positive at this inspection. People told us they knew who the registered and deputy manager were, and they felt comfortable to talk to them about anything. One person told us, they had been listened to when they were anxious, and the registered manager had helped them to raise concerns with an outside agency.

Relatives told us they had been improvements, a relative told us, “I have asked questions, and they would get back, either through messaging or phone calls, or face to face. Mainly face to face.” Another relative told us, “This was the first time I have attended and the only other one prior to that I was unable to make it, but it’s only recently been set up. The manager said it would be happening regularly, and they would want our opinions on things. The residents that were there did not have any issues about saying what they thought. There wasn’t any nervousness from them. It was nice to see.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had the choice of which GP they registered with and everyone at the service had chosen the GP surgery next to the service.

People could access the amenities and clinics easily in person the same as people living in the community. People had been referred to health care professionals when their needs changed.

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’s care plans had been developed to meet people desired outcomes, this included strategies to support people to go out or make their own decisions.

The registered manager understood the importance for people to achieve the outcome they wanted. Staff worked with people’s strengths to develop strategies to reach their goals such as going out or using a piece of equipment to be more independent when being moved.

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 were supported to make decisions about their lives including where they were going to live. One person chatted to us about making the decision about whether to go back to their birthplace or if they wanted to stay at the service. They felt supported by staff and had been given the information, but they had not been pushed into a decision.

People had an end of life care plan. Some people’s plans had more detail than others, but all had anticipatory plans about where they wanted to receive treatment.