Windsor Court

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 good. 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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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 service ensured people experienced consistent, quality care and achieved positive outcomes regardless of their background or individual needs. Care plans reflected people’s goals and preferences, and staff worked closely with external professionals to ensure equal access to health services and therapies. The registered manager told us person-centred care was important to the service to ensure staff values aligned with promoting dignity and respect. For example, an experienced candidate was not appointed because their previous role involved making decisions for people. The registered manager felt the candidate’s long-standing experience could make it difficult to adapt to the service’s person-centred approach, where staff empowered people to make their own choices.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.