Westerley 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. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. We received positive feedback from professionals who visited the service regularly. We were told, “I would recommend this home with no hesitation. The kindness here is second to none.” Another professional said, “Staff are kind and caring towards patients and their interactions with them.”

People and their relatives confirmed staff treated them with dignity. A relative said, “They make sure anything done is always done privately.” A person told us, “They do respect my privacy and dignity.”

The registered manager treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s care records included details of their social, cultural and personal interests. People felt staff understood their needs and preferences. A person told us, “They know me and what I like and don’t like. We have a chart in our room with personal tastes and likes/dislikes recorded on it.”

The registered manager supported people from various faiths and staff supported them with the different celebrations such as Diwali and Hanukkah. They supported people to attend a local church for a service organised for people living with dementia. A relative told us, “Cultural needs are met…they have asked me to let them know of any events.” Another relative said, “[Person] has been going on and enjoying trips to church etc at Christmas and Easter.”

The registered manager promoted people’s independence, and ensured they had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported people to be independent. A relative told us, “They do encourage [person] to do as much as [they] can, like brush [their] teeth and choose clothes.” A professional said, “Patients are encouraged to do what they can for themselves with support, so they do not lose their ability.”

People were supported to make choices. We observed a staff member show a person a tray with 3 plates of food to help them understand the options for lunch.

Staff supported people with activities in the home and going out. We observed group activities in communal areas and saw people engaged well and appeared to enjoy them. A person’s relative spoke highly of the activities coordinator and told us they encouraged people to participate in exercise activities who hadn’t previously.

Most people and their relatives felt people were supported with activities and we were given examples of going out as well as activities in the home. A person’s relative said, “They try and encourage [person] to enter into things.” However, some people who were more independent did not feel there was always enough for them to do. A person told us, “There’s nothing to do… They try to get me to do bingo but it’s not really my thing.” We reviewed the activities planner for the month and found this was quite generic with board games, bingo, arts and crafts and did not appear to be personalised to people’s individual interests.

The registered manager 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 interacted well with people. We observed some positive interactions during our visits. For example, we saw staff supporting a person at lunchtime who initially pushed staff away when they were trying to put on a clothes protector and again when offering drinks. They took their time to encourage them and showed them the spoon to help them understand it was lunch time. The pace of care and different approaches meant the person accepted their support.

The registered manager had a memory file for each person. These included photos from the past and recent events which could be used to support staff engagement if the person became distressed. They had pictures which were used to support people to express emotions and pain and to support communication with staff.

The registered manager did not always promote the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff gave mixed feedback about working at the service. The majority of staff told us they felt supported by the managers. A staff member said, “Staff work as a team, managers are approachable and supportive, and there’s a strong focus on person-centred care. I feel proud to be part of the service.” However, 5 staff gave negative feedback. We were told staff were fearful of speaking up and were told what to say if approached by inspectors. A staff member said, “Staff are forced to send feedback emails, and some of the positive feedback received may be a result of this pressure rather than genuine opinion.” This meant we were not assured all staff felt well supported by the managers of the service.

Staff supervision records included feedback from the manager provided ahead of the meeting but did not detail the discussion. There were not always responses from the member of staff or evidence of managers being supportive and encouraging them to raise anything they would like to discuss.