Westley Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.
meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.
 

This service scored 72 (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 Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. During our assessment, we identified several environmental safety concerns. For example, some windows were not fitted with tamper-proof restrictors which meant they opened beyond safe limits, increasing the risk of harm to people using the service. We also found exposed hot pipes, which placed people at risk of burns. In addition, the provider did not flush unused or infrequently used taps at the required frequency, with records showing this was only completed monthly. This increased the risk associated with water safety management. Although we found no evidence people had come to harm as a result of these issues, the provider's monitoring systems had not identified or addressed these concerns. We fed back these and other safety issues identified during the assessment to the provider, who responded promptly and took immediate action to address them while we were on site. This included fitting tamper-proof window restrictors, covering exposed hot pipes, and introducing an increased flushing regime for unused and infrequently used taps to improve environmental and water safety.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. The provider operated effective systems to oversee the administration and recording of medicines. Staff recorded medicines administration in line with best practice and regularly reviewed people's medicines to ensure they remained appropriate. The provider used an electronic medicines administration record (e-MAR) system and maintained clear guidance to support staff to administer medicines safely. Staff completed regular competency assessments to ensure they had the skills, knowledge and confidence to manage medicines safely and effectively. Staff also monitored room and medicine fridge temperatures, which remained within the required parameters. However, the provider could strengthen some areas of medicines management. For example, staff did not always review and record the effectiveness of 'as required' (PRN) medicines to demonstrate whether they achieved the intended outcome. In addition, staff did not always ensure antibiotics were administered at evenly spaced intervals to support their effectiveness. We raised these issues with the provider, who was receptive to our feedback and took steps to address them. Following our feedback, the provider issued guidance and expectations to staff responsible for administering medicines to reinforce good practice and support compliance with medicines management requirements and relevant guidance.