We inspected West Heath House on a weekday and found that 16 people were at home on that day. We observed people during the day and talked with two people. We talked with the manager and the two deputy managers. We looked in detail at the care records of two people. We spoke with one health professionals, two relatives and two members of staff. We last inspected this service on 19 November 2013. At that time we found that people’s views and experiences were not always taken into account or acted upon. At this inspection we found that these issues had been addressed. West Heath House is primarily a rehabilitation unit for people with an acquired brain injury. People’s needs and support changes over time. We found that people’s views and experiences had been included at an individual level so that it was appropriate for each person.
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes the records we looked at and what people using the service and staff told us.
If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
There were procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse. The manager had a good understanding of issues around safeguarding and their role in protecting people. Staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. There were policies and procedures in place to make sure that unsafe practice would be identified and people would be protected. There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people who lived at the home.
Risk assessments and health and safety measures were in place and regularly reviewed. These kept people safe. A social worker told us, “I’ve always found them to be very well informed. They are brilliant. Their recording is meticulous.” We saw people were cared for in an environment that was safe and suitable for their needs.
Is the service effective?
It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a very good understanding of people’s care and support needs and that they knew them well. People told us that they were happy with the care that had been delivered.The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care safely and effectively. We saw that people were treated with dignity and care. All the people we spoke with told us they were satisfied with the care and support they received. One person told us, “The staff are nice, I recently started to feel that I am getting my independence back.”
Is the service caring?
All staff were aware of peoples choices, preferences and support needs. One person told us, I like it here, the staff are lovely. They are kind to me.” We found the care and support was delivered with dignity and people’s decisions were respected. We saw the staff and manager were patient and gave encouragement when they supported people. A relative told us, “I think they are really friendly and they really help. They have been really good with X.”
Is the service responsive?
We saw clear and detailed records that ensured the manager could make timely and informed decisions about a person’s care and support. There were enough staff on duty to provide adequate care and support. We saw that the home had good access to other health professionals that meant it could respond quickly to a person’s changing needs. A relative told us, “We have no problems with the care X receives, no issues at all. We hear from them regularly. The managers are fine and keep us informed.”
Is the service well-led?
The systems in place to ensure the quality of the service were regularly assessed and monitored to ensure they were robust. The manager was aware of their responsibilities in meeting the essential standards of quality and safety.
Staff we spoke with told us they thought the manager was approachable and provided good support. One member of staff told us, “It’s a nice place to be. The new manager is brilliant. The managers are a good team and they are easy to approach.”
We found that the process of making sure supervisions and appraisals had taken place was not clear. Many supervisions and appraisals had not taken place.