• Care Home
  • Care home

Westerfield House Care Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Westerfield House, Humber Doucy Lane, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP4 3QG (01473) 232974

Provided and run by:
Westerfield House Care Ltd

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 14 and 15 January 2026. Westerfield House Care Ltd is a residential care home providing support to up to 37 older people and younger adults living with dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection visits, there were 30 people using the service. This comprehensive inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service, including the length of time since the last rating.

The provider had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents and measures put in place to reduce them happening again. Systems were in place to reduce risks of abuse and avoidable harm. The facilities and equipment met people’s needs, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. Staffing levels were kept under review and staff received training relevant to their role. Staff managed medicines well and safely.

People were involved in assessments of their needs, and these were used to inform care plans, which were kept under review. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff monitored people’s health to support healthy living, including ensuring people had enough to eat and drink. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. Staff responded to people in a timely way. The provider supported staff wellbeing.

People’s care records included guidance for staff in how their person-centred care was to be provided. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People’s preferences were sought and documented, including their end-of-life decisions. There was a complaints procedure in place and concerns were investigated, responded to and used to improve the service.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and felt supported to give feedback. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

15 December 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Westerfield House Care Limited is a residential home with nursing. It provides personal care to up to 32 adults, some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 29 people living in the home.

We found the following examples of good practice.

¿ The service was clean, hygienic and free of unpleasant odours throughout.

¿ Staff had received relevant training in infection control and prevention and had their competencies assessed by the management team in this area.

¿ There was sufficient supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE), with designated stations in the service for staff to access. Staff were observed wearing PPE appropriately in line with national guidance.

¿ Individual risk assessments had been conducted in consultation with people who used the service and or their representatives. These were regularly reviewed.

¿ Risks to staff in relation to their health, safety and well-being had been assessed and were monitored. Where individual risks had been identified, control measures had been implemented to mitigate against the risk.

¿ The environment was well organised and had been adapted to support social distancing.

¿ The provider had appropriate infection control policies and procedures in place. These had been developed in line with current government guidance and fully implemented in the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

23 August 2017

During a routine inspection

Westerfield House provides accommodation, care and support for up to 31 older people. Some people were living with dementia. There were 23 people living in the service when we carried out an unannounced inspection on 23 August 2017. This was the first comprehensive ratings inspection of this service.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons.’ Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People received care and support that was personalised to them in line with their individual needs and wishes. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and interacted with them in a caring, compassionate and professional manner. They were knowledgeable about people’s choices, views and preferences. The atmosphere in the service was friendly and welcoming.

People were safe and staff knew what actions to take to protect them from abuse. The provider had processes in place to identify and manage risk. Regular assessments had been carried out and care records were in place which reflected individual needs and preferences.

Recruitment checks on staff were carried out with sufficient numbers employed who had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs.

People received their medicines safely and medicines were managed in line with the provider’s policy and procedures. Clear records were maintained and medicines were stored safely.

People were encouraged to attend appointments with relevant professionals to maintain their health and well-being. Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely.

People and or their representatives, where appropriate, were involved in making decisions about their care and support arrangements. As a result people received care and support which was planned and delivered to meet their specific needs. Staff listened to people and acted on what they said.

We found that people were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were encouraged to maintain relationships that mattered to them such as family, community and other social links. They were supported to pursue their hobbies and to participate in activities of their choice. This protected people from the risks of social isolation and loneliness.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to voice their concerns if they were unhappy with the care they received. People’s feedback was valued and acted on. There was visible leadership within the service and a clear management structure. The service had a quality assurance system with identified shortfalls addressed promptly which helped the service to continually improve.