Westcott House Nursing Home

“We found the provider’s governance processes needed to improve in order to consistently identify areas of improvement and address these. Whilst there had been significant improvement in environmental aspects of the service, areas such as care records were not always person-centred and incidents were not always shared with all appropriate agencies consistently.”

“Staff had received an induction, training and regular supervisions, but they did not always understand safeguarding or the risk of isolation, and some staff told us they did not always feel able to speak up.”

“Equipment was not always set according to people’s weight, such as air-flow mattresses to reduce the risk of developing pressure areas and staff did not always reposition people in line with their risk assessments. Whilst people had not been directly impacted, the provider’s systems did not always identify these.”

“There were generally sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited safely but we found that mealtimes were unorganised due to ineffective staff deployment at specific times when people required extra support. People had to wait for their meals or to be assisted out of their rooms. People were rushed to eat where they needed assistance to do so, and some people received cold meals due to a long wait. Activities were not always tailored to people’s needs and we received mixed feedback from people and their relatives in relation to the provision of activities.”

“We have found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and the governance of the service.”

“The registered manager and provider were responsive when we made them aware of these shortfalls, and they provided us with assurances that the areas had been addressed. However, the systems needed to become embedded in the service. Before the completion of this assessment, the provider recruited a quality assurance manager and involved an external consultant to address all areas in a coherent way.”

“People’s needs were assessed before they moved into the service and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.”

“Health and safety checks of the premises were undertaken regularly. Healthcare professionals and partners told us the service was responsive to people’s needs.”

“Information was available in a format that suited people. The registered manager understood how barriers to people’s care affected them and were aware of the challenges. They told us they tried to foster an open culture, and the majority of feedback from staff and external partners reflected this.”