Winterfell Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 80 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff always treated people with kindness, compassion, and respect, making sure their privacy and dignity were protected. People living at the service told us that staff listened to them and communicated in a caring and respectful way. Staff also showed the same level of kindness and respect when working with professionals from other organisations. We saw staff taking time to understand each person’s needs, preferences, and choices, and providing support in a way that was thoughtful and dignified. They explained how they adapted their approach for different individuals to ensure everyone felt valued and well cared for.

People were consistently treated as unique individuals, with staff demonstrating an exceptional commitment to understanding and responding to each person’s personal history, preferences, and emotional needs. The service fostered a deeply person-centred culture, where care was shaped around the individual rather than the condition, and staff went to great lengths to ensure people felt valued, respected, and understood.

Staff had access to detailed information in care plans which contained personalised information regarding people’s strengths and abilities, cultural, religious and social needs.

Feedback from people and their families highlighted the compassionate and tailored nature of support, and staff were observed adapting their communication and care strategies to reflect each person’s mood, behaviour, and cognitive ability.

One person at the service was assessed as requiring a specialist chair. The provider purchased this, for the sole use of the person, providing them with the opportunity to sit out, and attend communal lounges if they wanted to. Had the provider not sourced the specialist equipment, this would not have been possible.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People’s social needs were understood. People were supported to maintain and develop their relationships with those close to them, their social networks and community. People had free access to their family, friends and community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing.

There was an activities coordinator employed by the service. People who had capacity were free to access the community, and those who lacked capacity were supported by staff. There was a pool table which we observed staff using with residents. However, professionals attending the service reported that there was often a lack of activities taking place.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff showed concern for people’s wellbeing in a caring and meaningful way. They responded to people’s needs quickly enough to avoid any preventable discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us staff were always responsive to their needs, explaining that call bells were responded to in a timely manner. We observed call bells being responded to swiftly during the assessment which evidenced people were not left waiting when they requested support.

Staff were alert to people’s needs and took time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs. This meant they responded in the most appropriate way to respect people’s wishes, needs and preferences.

We observed people being supported throughout the day. We saw staff check on people who were not able to use a call bell to call for assistance.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Many of the staff we spoke with had been working at the service for a number of years and had experienced a lot of change which they felt had improved the service offered.

Staff reported feeling valued and well supported by management, with access to regular supervision and training. One person told us, “[management] are really supportive, I can go to them about anything. I don’t feel judged, I feel listened to.”

Supervisions proved to be detailed, and staff found them beneficial. Supervision included what staff had done well, as well as actions to help further their knowledge and skills, meaning people living at the service could receive a high standard of care.