Westwood Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to good governance and records.

This service scored 61 (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 had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities. Improvements had been made to ‘open’ the culture so people and staff could speak up, and people were the main focus of care delivery. However further improvements were needed to obtain people’s engagement and feedback and to help ensure person-centred care was provided. New staff received support and training which helped them to demonstrate the provider’s values in their daily work with people. Staff members said they now worked as a team and morale was much improved. Their comments included, “I think the culture is okay, staff have said that it is better since the manager came into post” and “There have been management changes, things are getting better.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Staff comments included, “We have a new manager, there have been changes for the good for both staff and residents”, “Staff feel safe and can go to the manager” and “The registered manager will listen and act.”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.The provider had a clear whistle blowing policy. Staff could raise concerns, and written information was available of how to do this. Staff meetings took place, and staff had the opportunity to share comments and give feedback. A staff member commented, “I think the manager is approachable, I would definitely raise any concerns with them, they are fair, they do not judge.” Another staff member told us, “There are more meetings, they are good to share information, they are recorded, so those staff who cannot attend can read what has been said.” People were informed of the complaints procedure when they started to use the service.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them. Staff told us they were able to ask for reasonable adjustments to be made to their working patterns for specific needs, for example to incorporate family commitments. A staff member commented, “Shift patterns are better, fairer, everyone works all floors and gets to know people.”

Improvements were needed to governance to ensure the governance system was effective and robust, including the monitoring of the quality-of-service provision. Staff and leaders knew their responsibilities around quality and safety monitoring and governance. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. Regular audits and checks were carried out in the main areas of the service, such as, around care records, health and safety and staff practice. The registered manager and senior staff could explain governance systems in the service and their individual responsibilities. However, there were areas in need of improvement as identified with medicines management, the environment, infection control, people’s dining experience, activities, people’s involvement, person-centred care and care records.

Staff at the service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. A range of care professionals described the positive working relationships the staff had promoted for the benefit of people who used the service. The management team were positive about their links with local partners and health and social care teams.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. A staff member commented, “Learning is shared at handover and staff meetings.” There was evidence of changes that had been made to the service to make improvements and to address checks and audits outcomes and in response to people and staff feedback. However, we identified further improvements were needed in areas as described in sections of the above report.