Woodbridge House

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.

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.

The provider worked with people to ensure care was person centred and reflected their preferences and daily routines. Relatives consistently reported that staff understood people well. People showed comfort around staff who supported them with warmth and patience. Staff told us they tailored support around people’s needs and preferences. One staff member told us, “Everything is my favourite when it comes to them. It's never about my preference, so if they are interested then I am interested. If they see you are fully involved then it makes their day.”

People’s care plans provided detailed information about people’s communication, sensory needs, likes and dislikes. A relative told us, “She’s getting the best care that they can give her, as people get older their likes and dislikes change, the staff are very open to seeing that and going with it and doing what they can.”

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.

People’s care and support was delivered in a way that met their assessed needs. People received consistent, quality support from staff who knew them well. A relative told us, “There’s enough staff and they just know how to respond… they’re well organised.”

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

Staff provided people and relatives with clear, accessible information about care, daily activities and changes in health needs. Relatives told us they were kept up to date through phone calls and when they visited, with some saying they were notified “instantly” when issues occurred and felt included in planning solutions. People were provided information in ways that were meaningful to them and individual to their needs.

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.

People were listened to and involved in decisions about their care. It was clear that people’s voice was sought and listened to. People had been encouraged to take part in surveys about the service, which had been produced to their individual communication needs. Relatives and loved ones had also had their feedback sought via surveys, with positive feedback received about the service. When things needed addressing, action plans were put into place to ensure improvements were implemented and shared with all stakeholders.

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

People had access to healthcare, community activities and specialist support based on their needs. Staff supported people to access cafés, shops, adult learning, social clubs and local transport as part of their weekly routines. People were given support to overcome barriers to ensure equal access to health and well-being support. A relative told us that their loved one had no barriers to their support telling us, “She’s just had a haircut and she’s getting new glasses. They organise all of that.”

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.

People experienced fair and consistent care regardless of their level of need. A relative told us, “Staff treat people as individuals… they’re not all the same, so they’re not treated the same.” We observed staff adapting their approach depending on each person’s needs ensuring everyone had opportunities to participate in activities they enjoyed. Staff supported people with varying mobility, sensory needs or communication styles to engage in group activities such as music sessions, trampolining or café visits or to do individual activities depending on people’s preferences.

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 future goals, changes in health and preferred activities. Relatives told us staff encouraged people with new opportunities and maintaining routines people valued. One person was supported to make steps towards accessing adult education.

People’s end of life wishes were known and respected. Staff had provided sensitive caring support to people at the end of their lives which had been really impactful on relatives. One relative told us, “I was so grateful, they were so kind, they have been so supportive to me.”

Staff had access to support when people had passed away, including access to the providers well-being team, taking part in de-briefs and access to the providers employee assistance programme.