Whell Care

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 71 (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 did make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they worked in partnership with people, but did not document this appropriately.

Daily records showed that people were supported in line with their care plans. People, relatives and health and social care professionals had input in to care plans; however, they lacked person-centred information. There was no evidence to suggest this had impact the quality of care people received. People felt that staff knew them well. A relative said, “[Whell Care are] the best care company [person] has ever had, they understand them, they have become friends to them, and they now have a social life. They can’t and won’t go out on their own, so this company has changed their life completely, they are happier than I have ever known.”

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.

Staff received suitable training and shadowed care before being assigned to a person, to ensure they had the right approach with each person. People were involved in their local communities, and the provider holds afternoon tea events for people to come together and meet each other.

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

The registered manager explained that one person got very distressed if their limitations were discussed with them. They discussed their abilities rather than disabilities now and worked with family to ensure their care needs were being met. Staff communicated with people in the most appropriate way for them.

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 provider was available and open to receiving feedback from people, staff and families. The management team spoke regularly to people or their advocates to check they were happy.

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

Staff understood the importance of ensuring people had access to the right health and social care services . People were referred to specialist services when required and reported no issues with accessing the support they required.

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 registered manager ensured staff understood people’s needs, preferences and anxieties. Although people’s needs or preferences were not always documented fully in care records, we were assured that staff knew people well and provided care that met their needs.

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.

At the time of the inspection no one was receiving end of life care. Staff had received suitable training, and guidance was in place if people needed this.