- Care home
Westerfield House Care Ltd
Assessment report published 20 February 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
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.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 8 people who used the service, 2 relatives and a person’s visitor.
All of the people we spoke with told us they, or their relative or friend, were happy living in the service and staff were available when needed. A person told us, “I’m comfortable and well looked after. The care is good here.” Another person said, “I’m quite happy and get all the care I need.”
People and relatives told us they felt the staff were caring and compassionate, this was confirmed by our observations and when speaking with staff. They talked about their role and the people they cared for in a caring way. A person said, “The staff are wonderful and I’m looked after so well.” Another person told us, “People are treated very well. Respect, kindness and care is wonderful here.”
People could have visitors when they wanted and were supported to maintain relationships where they chose, to reduce the risks of isolation. People had access to group and individual activities to reduce risks of boredom.
People knew how to give feedback, including concerns and complaints, and were confident the provider took it seriously and acted on it. People knew who the management team were and told us they were approachable. People said their choices and decisions about their care were respected. People felt safe in the home and commented on how clean it was kept.
People had access to health professionals when needed. We observed lunch time and saw that people had a positive mealtime experience, people told us they had choices and enough to eat and drink.