Weston Favell Houses

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. People spoke positively about the care and support they received and expressed a high level of satisfaction. A person told us, “Staff are great. Very caring. Nothing is too much trouble.” Relatives also spoke highly of the service. A relative told us, “Yes, staff are kind and caring. They definitely treat [relative] with dignity and respect.” Another relative told us, “I definitely think staff are kind, caring and listen.”

We saw lots of interaction between staff and people using the service. Staff communicated effectively with people. Staff told us how they treated people with respect. A staff member said, “This is a home where residents, staff, families, and professionals are all treated with genuine respect and kindness. That’s why the relationships here are so strong.”

The interactions that we observed during our assessment reflected the feedback we received from people and their relatives.

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

People and their relatives told us they were treated as individuals. A relative told us, “Yes, I do feel that staff listen to my [relative] and treat [relative] as an individual.” Another relative told us, “They listen to [relative], and [relative] is encouraged to make choices that matter to [relative], for example, [relative] is a night owl, but nobody says go to bed.”

People were able to personalise their rooms according to their preferences. A relative told us their relative’s home was, “definitely [relatives’] home with all [their] own stuff,” and their relative, “Loves Teek furniture,” so that was what was in their bedroom.

We found people’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs, including those relating to people expressing their sexuality were assessed by the service and had supporting care and risk mitigation plans.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People and their relatives told us they were supported to have choice and control. We found people were being supported to live as independently as possible with support from the multi-disciplinary team (MDT). A person told us, “I do the shopping myself. I enjoy it. I also put the bins out and get them in each week” A relative told us, “They very much promote his independence and choice,” and, “Staff go out of their way to support [relative] for example taking [relative] to see [name of football club] and going with [relative] to see [their] sister”.

People were supported to take part in activities that were important to them. For example, meals out, shopping, or trips to the pub. A relative told us their family member was an, “Outdoors person who loved DIY and gardening.” Some people accessed the community and activities independently or with minimal support from staff. For example, one person told us they supported a football team, and they would go to watch matches independently but had an agreed safety plan with staff.

We observed a quiz taking place at the service, involving people and all staff on shift. There were regular opportunities for activities within the service and at other services operated by the provider. For example, there was annual events organised that people told us they enjoyed, including ‘Oakfest’ and St Patrick’s Day that involved live music, games and food.

People’s right to privacy and a personal life was respected by the staff team. People were supported to develop independent living skills, for example, taking part in cooking and cleaning.

The provider did not always provide staff with adequate guidance that enabled them to respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed staff were attentive to people and their needs during our assessment. People and relatives told us they felt their views and wishes were listened to by staff. A friend of a person told us, “Part of the reason my [friend] is doing so well is because they listen to [friend] and understand their needs.”

We found staff knew the people they were supporting well, and they were able to anticipate their needs. A friend of a person told us, “The most crucial way they [staff] keep my friend safe is to identify when [they] are becoming anxious.”
There was behaviour care plans and positive behaviour support guidance for people experiencing emotional distress that had specialist multi-disciplinary team (MDT) input from a clinical psychologist. However, we found the behaviour care plans were dated and although they had been regularly reviewed, current risks, desired outcomes and interventions were not easily identifiable. This meant we could not be assured staff always followed the most up to date guidance when people were anxious or distressed.

The provider told during the assessment the action they had taken to address these findings and assured us this work had commenced.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

The provider had an employee assistance program (EAP) to provide staff with well-being assistance if required.

Staff were encouraged to nominate colleagues for their employee of the month scheme, and the winner was awarded a trophy and voucher. The provider recognised staff by sharing thank you cards and a voucher and we were told staff were also recognised for their length of service.

There were opportunities for staff to take part in well-being activities, for example, a pottery painting session took place to promote staff mindfulness. The provider had a charitable foundation that staff were able to apply for grant money from for charitable causes.

Staff received regular supervision and appraisals, and staff told us the provider’s approach to well-being had positively impacted on their length of service. A staff member told us, “Even when something happens outside of work they are there for you – they go over and above to support you – they are like a family.”