Archived: Westfield 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

People told us they received appropriate care provision at the time of the assessment. People told this had not always been the case previously, but improvements had been made in this area. Partners were mostly positive in their comments regarding care provision, but felt the provider would benefit from increased partnership working. People and their relatives were involved in the running of the service and were confident in raising concerns should they need to. People told us they felt the management team would value their concerns and take them seriously.

This service scored 21 (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.

People gave us mixed feedback on the subject of care provision, integration and continuity. A relative told us the changes in the staff team and management had an impact on their loved one, resulting in a period of increased risk to due inconsistency in care. However, since the new manager arrived the person felt much better about care provision, and their loved one had input from the community mental health team and could access other health services. A person told us, "A lot was promised but not all has been delivered. There are communication issues and my care plans are not up to date". The provider was working towards rectifying these concerns.

Staff described the internal and external services who work with people. The staff team supported people to manage and attend appointments with transport and direct support. Health and social care professionals such as clinical and mental health nurses visited the service frequently, and people were supported to attend appointments with the psychiatrist. We saw evidence that people's social workers and GPs were involved in people's care. Where people were at risk of harm, staff and leaders worked with the local authority commissioners to ensure risks were managed safely.

We received mixed feedback from professionals regarding care provision, integration and continuity. Partners told us they felt the staff knew the people they supported well, including how to manage risk. However, a professional told us there was some tension between the provider and professionals regarding people receiving care from a multi disciplinary approach. This was because the provider utilised a lot of professionals who they employed directly.

People's care plans evidenced that key people and partners were involved in developing people's care and support. Positive outcomes were recorded which evidenced people accessing the local community and working towards forging new and meaningful relationships. Care plans evidenced the involvement of other professionals in college and healthcare settings.

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

People told us they felt engaged in the running of the service and were able to express their views. A relative said, "I can now flag hiccups with the new management team and they will address them.” People knew how to raise complaints should they want or need to, and were able to name who they would escalate their concerns to. A person told us things had been much more positive recently, stating, "Things have been raised before and they have been dealt with by staff."

Staff were able to describe the process for receiving and escalating complaints and feedback from people and their relatives. Staff told us they were confident in raising concerns to the management team, and felt they would be addressed appropriately.

People had access to the complaints process and this was observed on display within the home. The complaints policy clearly outlined how people can raise complaints and this was further supported by a service user guide, which supported people to give feedback should they wish to.

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.

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

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.