Windsor House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans reviewed were personalised and provided staff with clear written guidance on how the person would like to be supported. It provided staff with detailed guidance on their likes and preferences. We observed care and support was person–centred. For example, a person liked to wake up around 10am have a shower and then have breakfast and their preferred routine was followed by staff. A person is supported to a day centre they enjoy. A relative told us, “My relative does go to a day centre and says that it is college. [person] enjoys it there.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The management team and staff had a good understanding of people’s health care needs and who was involved in people’s health care. Staff worked with other stakeholders such as local authority and health professionals for joined up working.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. A person’s communication method was the use of photos and objects of reference. The registered manager had ensured there was photos in place to allow effective communication. We observed these available for staff and the person in the kitchen.

The provider did make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. A relative felt they could raise concerns to staff and felt staff would listen. Staff did involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result. A relative told us the home does keep them updated and involved in their relative’s care. They told us, “They rang me yesterday to tell me about you ringing today and whilst on the phone they used Face Time so I could speak to and see my relative; although they don’t usually do this this video calling.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People benefitted from a home which was accessible and inclusive for all. The home was adapted to ensure people could safely access all areas. For example, stair rails were put in place and an adapted shower room.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. for example, a person’s daily records showed they health professionals had been contacted when needed and the person had been supported by staff to attend their health checks such dentist, optician and breast screening.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. People had end of life care plans in place. This meant people were provided with the opportunity to plan for any life changing events in the future and be able to express their wishes and preferences.