Wollaton View Care Home

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 Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

During our last inspection of the service, we found the provider was in breach of regulation in relation to person centred care. Improvements were found at this inspection, and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.

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.

People’s care and treatment was effective due to their care and communication needs being robustly documented for staff to follow to provide support. People’s care plans were kept up to date with important information from external health teams, to ensure people received the care and support they required.

Staff understood how to react if people experienced a change in their condition or required ongoing monitoring of an existing health need. Staff were aware of people’s preferences, and these were being respected in a person-centred way. Staff were given time to read and understand the care plans in place for people. This gave them a better understanding of people, and their support needs.

Wollaton View supported people to remain as active participants in their local community. One staff member explained how the service had formed links with local childminders, and the positive impact this had for people. We observed a lovely group session, between people and the visiting children. There was singing and laughter, and evidence the service values this inter-generational contact. One person said, “I prefer to be on my own mostly but wanted to see the children today. My relative takes me out for a pub meal or shopping and takes my wheelchair to support me.” Another person said, “It feels homely here and I’ve got company and family who visit.”

Our observations of the interactions between staff and people during our inspection was of a calm, relaxed environment with management and staff interacting well with people. People were happy with the support the service was providing them with. A relative told us, “Staff will spend time with my family member and do their nails and have a chat. The activity coordinator takes some people over to the local church or to the pub. They always offer to take them or relatives can come along too with their family member.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supportive of choice and continuity.

People we spoke with told us that a weekly GP round was made, with a doctor on call and nurse visits to people as necessary. An optician eye check could be arranged and a chiropodist visited the service regularly. Physiotherapy support was also provided as necessary.

The service worked on maintaining and improving their relationships with external health and social care partners. We saw prompt referrals had been made to support people with their identified needs. For example, people who may need specialist equipment for managing falls or supporting good skin integrity.

A member of staff spoke of the improved processes in place to ensure people received continuity in their dietary management needs. They told us, “We have a good relationship with the dietetics team, we ask for and share information.” Another staff member explained how the service had put together ‘snack packs’ which were available if a person is taken to hospital. These were designed to give people some sustenance during their visit.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider was meeting the Accessible Information Standard. People's communication needs were understood and well supported. People were provided with information they needed to make decisions about their care and support in a format they understood. Staff understood how to communicate in a way that suited people as individuals.

The provider was receptive to providing any aids to assist communication for people. This

included computer devices, mobile phones, alarms, signage and easy read material if required.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The management team had a clearly displayed complaints process and followed freedom to speak up principles. This ensured people felt empowered to have their say about things that were important to them. The management team completed regular service user surveys with people, enabling them to share their opinions on their care.

We received positive responses related to people feeling listened to and confident their views would be acted upon. People and their relatives all told us they would raise any concerns with the management team. One person said, “We meet in the lounge once a month and we talk about what’s coming up for activities and food ideas. They listen to us and we do see changes.” A relative told us, “They’re very good at listening, in fact, they’re helping sort out my family members funding for us, as we’re still waiting for a decision on who’s paying what.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were supported to maintain relationships with those who were important to them. We saw family and friends of people were able to visit and were made welcome by the staff team. The service had protected times advertised, where visitors were encouraged not to attend. These were primarily to enable effective support with personal care during the morning and people’s support needs at lunchtimes. One relative told us, “We come most days, and are aware it has to be between 10.30-12.00 so we don’t clash with lunch.”

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.

The culture at Wollaton View had improved since our last assessment and now supported people to flourish, without fear of prejudice. People were enabled to access community facilities, follow their faith, understand voting and lead a full life.

People were supported to be part of activities which had meaning for them. One person said, “I help out with the activities noticeboard by doing the colouring in. We go to a Wednesday coffee morning at the church; I’ve been a few times.”

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 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’s care plans were detailed regarding their spirituality and communication of end of life wishes. Staff had received training in end-of-life care and managing deaths. Staff we spoke with showed knowledge, understanding and empathy regarding caring for people at the end of their lives.

If people did not wish to discuss their end of life wishes, we saw processes had been established for what actions staff should take in an emergency medical situation.